In the mood of constructive criticism upon which this thread is founded, no, I wouldn’t say “Angry” but I’d probably call it confrontational. No, it’s not wrong, not actionable, and probably not a big deal at all, but it can be a bit off-putting.
I would never, use the term “hater” even in the diminished meaning of @Czarcasm’s later response for his posts.
But confrontational, perhaps even aggressive in his arguments? Sure. The more accurate term though (IMHO) is “painfully frustrated”. That attitude has nothing to do with the validity of his opinions or feelings, whether or not I agree with him (which I do most, but not all of the time to be clear).
But yeah, it’s mostly a low-stakes argument about “tone” such as @LSLGuy is (legitimately) complaining about. If we weren’t such nitpickers, it wouldn’t be worth snarking about, but, well, we’re both on this board and in the Pit, so really, 'tis to be expected. 
If we were seriously considering trying to grow our userbase (the subject of many a thread) then perhaps, just maybe we’d want to consider how tone might affect new posters, but in our current circumstances, where 90+% of our new posters are trolls, trocks, or blow-ins seeking to score points, it’s a non-issue IMHO.
[ leaving out spammers of course, as they should be ignored, shunned, and disappeared, though granted, probably not shot]
And we’re generally pretty nice (keeping the gloves on at least) to new posters who don’t immediately jump into controversial subjects and topics with both boots (see the 90+% above).