zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. chris_+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-11-10 23:03:12
I got told repeatedly that I "knew why" I was rate limited, but never given an actual explanation. Then it was lifted. Go figure.
replies(1): >>tptace+yh
2. tptace+yh[view] [source] 2020-11-11 01:06:00
>>chris_+(OP)
The actual comment does not match your story.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16268353

replies(1): >>chris_+tI5
◧◩
3. chris_+tI5[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-11-12 21:23:06
>>tptace+yh
Oh really? I'm curious, I've kept all the emails. Did you read those emails, and if so, how? Do you know why I was rate limited?

The thread he referred to wasn't actually one I started. I made one comment in it. dang stated that "I'll try to give you more of a response later when I have time", but this never eventuated.

Incidentally, it was a very difficult time of my life, so I was genuinely reaching out to find out what I had done. His responses didn't help. I don't intend to comment further.

Edit: redacted a small part of this comment. It's unlikely to have been helpful, and it's unlikely the one I'm responding to would care.

replies(1): >>tptace+be8
◧◩◪
4. tptace+be8[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-11-13 17:33:04
>>chris_+tI5
I think the veracity of your description of the linked thread is probably similar to that of your description of these emails.
replies(1): >>chris_+8W9
◧◩◪◨
5. chris_+8W9[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-11-14 10:50:04
>>tptace+be8
Said without you ever reading them.

Not sure how the veracity of my description of the thread (that’s some tortuous indirect speech!) is inaccurate.

replies(1): >>tptace+WTa
◧◩◪◨⬒
6. tptace+WTa[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-11-14 20:06:12
>>chris_+8W9
Yeah, I didn't enjoy writing it either, but we're the only two people reading this subthread, so I'm not going to edit carefully. It's all a long-winded way of saying that the link upthread does a good enough job summing this whole situation.
[go to top]