Maybe 'unfit', 'ill-suited' or 'irrelevant' would be more suitable.

I love Cal's writing, but I feel like it's really going against his mantra (of Deep Work) to be making posts like this that try to pluck meaning out of nothing for the sake of marketing.

Your comment is so bloody weird. It gives off vibes of those dudes who one day shave their heads and then spend the rest of their lives telling you you should get rid of anger and embrace the light and all that rubbish. Or of Christian assholes wailing on repeat "Jesus still loves you" whenever you disagree with them.

I've too often found that weird is an indirect way of casting aspersions on something. For example, most people are unlikely to say...

> "That idea is unfamiliar to me, therefore I reject it."

... but many would be comfortable saying ...

> That idea is weird.

Shifting the language in that way isn't genuine; it obscures the core reasoning behind a rather vague word ("weird").

Of course, lots of other things can be happening when people use the word "weird"; they might select it carefully for some particular meaning. That's fine.

I sometimes suggest that people be more aware of how their writing comes across. If that is "weird" (definition below), then maybe we need more weird.

A comment gets read by many people, but it is only written by one. So if an author wants to communicate well, the author should be aware of the audience.

    weird
   
    suggesting something supernatural; uncanny:
    the weird crying of a seal.

    (informal) very strange; bizarre:
    a weird coincidence | 
    all sorts of weird and wonderful characters.