What is the etiquette on "calling out" individual users?

I am the person that posted the comment being discussed.

First, Lankymart, I apologize that my comment made you feel hurt and singled out. Neither of those things were my intent in leaving the comment. I am sorry that the comment made you feel that way.

My intent in leaving the comment was to indicate to the question OP that other users felt the question was on-topic.

I mentioned the discussion in SOCVR, because the three close-votes on the question argue that three people feel the question is off-topic and I considered it likely that those close-votes came as a result of your cv-pls request in SOCVR. I felt the OP deserved to know that other people felt the question was on-topic. I linked to the SOCVR discussion, because I did not feel it was appropriate to say that other people supported that the question was on-topic, or mention that there was a discussion, without giving the OP the opportunity to read the discussion and participate, if they chose. None of that conversation was private.

I mentioned you by name, because:

• one of your comments on the question argues that the question is off-topic, thus you were already indicated as believing the question was off-topic;
• the OP appeared to be swayed that the question may be off-topic by your comment and the 3 close-votes;
• the OP had specifically pinged you to ask you if it was more appropriate for the question to be on Stack Overflow or Super User (the only prior mention of Super User is as a suggested site in the close reason selected by 3 people);
• and you were continuing to participate in the discussion in comments on the question. By mentioning your name, it was not my intent to indicate who had close-voted (I didn't actually know, but would have guessed that you had close-voted). I was intending to acknowledge to the OP that you were the one already participating in the comments on the question who had expressed the opinion that the question was off-topic in a comment.

I mentioned that the "significant majority of people participating" (in the SOCVR discussion) felt the question was on-topic, because there were six participants in that conversation. Of those six, five of them expressed the opinion that PowerShell questions are on-topic and/or that the specific question was on-topic. To me, 5 out of 6 is a "significant majority" (and was sufficient opposition to your cv-pls request for that request to be removed from SOCVR). If the other close-voters were from SOCVR (based on information in this Q&A, that is likely, and I did consider it likely at that time), none of them expressed an opinion in the SOCVR discussion. At the time I wrote "significant majority", I was not considering anything other than the discussion in SOCVR with respect to defining "significant majority". If I had considered the close-votes, then it would have been 5 that felt it was on-topic and 3 which felt it was off-topic, which I probably wouldn't have stated as a "significant majority".

I used the words "vocal minority", because there was only one person who had expressed the opinion that the question was off-topic either in the comments on the question or in the discussion in SOCVR. I did not intend for "vocal minority" to be perceived as personally negative, or negative in general. I intended it to convey to the OP an acknowledgement that you were the only person who had mentioned in comments that the question was off-topic. Similar to what other people have said here, I don't consider "vocal minority" to be negative, merely descriptive. Given that you found "vocal minority" to be negative, and others have mentioned here that there are negative connotations, I would not use it again in this context.

So, again, I apologize that you felt hurt by my comment. That you were is far from my intent. Perhaps it would have been more appropriate for me to merely state my personal opinion, or at least not mention you by name (even though you had already mentioned in a comment on the question that you felt the question was off-topic). I am happy to delete the comment [I have deleted the comment and added one with text similar to what TylerH suggested in a comment below], perhaps with me posting something else (or a moderator editing the comment to remove your name, or the entire "vocal minority" sentence). I had not deleted the comment at the time I wrote this answer, because A) deleting it then probably wouldn't prevent the OP from having read it, as the OP was active 2 hours after you and I last made comments on the question, likely reading it at that time (this answer was 5 hours after the comment, so 3 hours after the OP probably read the comment), and B) the comment is under discussion here and you've brought a similar discussion up in SOCVR.

For the record, the comments on the question at the time just prior to me starting this answer were (partially anonymized):

I think this comment should not be posted. You didn't disclose you were one of the voters as far as I can see in the comment thread.

There is no added value in posting a comment naming you as one of the voters (or indicate that you were one of the users who think the question is off-topic), and calling you a minority sort of invalidates your vote or opinion. The way this was communicated is just missing its point.

Your flag should not have been declined.

I concur with Martijn; the comment reads on the face of it like a factual statement of the proceedings of an escalated and debated matter.

Being a vocal minority is nothing to be ashamed of. A vocal minority is essential to a fair and optimized decision-making process (a topic of my graduate studies).

In a democracy, the majority has the right to have their way, but where there is minority dissent, the majority can take into account the position of the minority to mitigate their concerns, leading to better outcomes.

Be proud of your contribution.