Exactly, that article was written by a VC. That does not make it a universal definition.

If an ad hominem is the best criticism you can come up with, it seems correct to me.

You might want to look up the meaning of ad hominem. There is nothing in my comment that is even remotely attacking either you personally or your character.

Saying that an article skews to the orientation and outlook of the author(in this case a venture capitalist) is no way an attack on that author.

The context of the entire comment was that this definition was not universal.

Then what's your response to this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14887245

An ad hominem doesn't need to be an attack to be an ad hominem. It's just an argument against the person instead of an argument against their argument.