When I read through the replies I see a lot of people who atleast imply that they use scripts and then provides their reasoning for why they do so.
Some quotes are:
“I wouldnt want to use WK without scripts now that I’ve seen them.”
“I don’t really use any scripts of consequence”
“Could I complete WK without scripts? Yeah I guess. Would I want to? Noooope.”
Doesn’t that mean they responded to the question?
The topic of this thread also makes it difficult to answer the question if you use scripts, since it is only aimed at people who does not use them. At the same time people want to voice their opinion.
I think some of the emotional responses has to do with the original wording of the thread, before the edit.
“A lot of users on the forums talk as though scripts are virtualy essential for success” can be interpreted as a challenge to how people use Wanikani or an accusation that the way that they use the site is in a “less pure” way. Not saying that was the intention, just that it is a possible interpretation that could have been avoided by more careful wording.
I think the edit that was made makes it better, but I am not surprised that this initial confrontational tone gives echoes in the kind of replies that get posted. If there is anything to learn here I think it is that wording of the first post of a thread is immensely important to how the rest of the discussion pans out.