It frosts me when people on EITHER side make short, curt, dismissive comments in AfD that consist simply of a vote and a _generic_ remark, like "Delete, nn website," or "Delete, [whatever]cruft," or "Keep, all [whatever] are inherently notable," or "KEEP! Of course. Why would anyone want to delete this?"
It's lazy, it's polarizing, and it tends to push AfD in the direction of being a vote (bad) rather than consensus-building discussion (good).
(Equally bad are appeals to _fictitious_ precedents or vague assertions that imply that concensus has been reached in areas where they have not).
People unwilling to take a few minutes to look seriously at an article and make a real, open-minded assessment of _that particular article,_ have nothing useful to contribute to the discussion and should refrain from posting.
To cast votes based on one's like or dislike for _a particular topic area_ is unhelpful.
And the accumulation of initialisms and jargon doesn't help either. For gosh sakes... if someone can't spare the 3.5 seconds it takes to type out the word "non-notable" in full, I have to question whether they've got enough time to do a thoughtful assessment of the article.
Personally, I comment in about one in five of the AfD discussions that I read through. If I were a better person than I am, it would be more like one in twenty. If I don't have something to say that is useful in forming a group opinion, I don't say it. (Well... actually... you know... I often do, anyway. But I SHOULDN'T).