Comment by OJFord 7 months ago The submitted isn't paywalled or down, are you expecting something to happen to it? 13 comments OJFord Reply avree 7 months ago Perhaps you are logged in with a "STAT Account"? When I load the link, it prompts me to create one in order to view the article. Sabinus 7 months ago Interesting, I didn't get that prompt. Read the whole thing fine, no login. OJFord 7 months ago Yup, same, hence my (oh so offensive, apparently) comment asking the reason, assuming it must be something else. OJFord 7 months ago Nope, never heard of Stat before. I could read it fine, no paywall, not sure maybe geographic or just hitting different users :shrug: southernplaces7 7 months ago Lucky you, was paywalled for me. Good thing they posted the link. OJFord 7 months ago Ok, yeah, great, I didn't hit that so I was just curious why they did, thinking must be some other reason. OJFord 7 months ago Bloody hell, I was only curious! It wasn't paywalled for me, I read it no problem. burnt-resistor 7 months ago Paywalled. OJFord 7 months ago Wasn't for me, as I said. burnt-resistor 7 months ago No worries. Must be some regional weirdness. US here. VPN or EU over there? 1 reply → santa_boy 7 months ago paywalled for me too OJFord 7 months ago Wasn't for me, as I said.
avree 7 months ago Perhaps you are logged in with a "STAT Account"? When I load the link, it prompts me to create one in order to view the article. Sabinus 7 months ago Interesting, I didn't get that prompt. Read the whole thing fine, no login. OJFord 7 months ago Yup, same, hence my (oh so offensive, apparently) comment asking the reason, assuming it must be something else. OJFord 7 months ago Nope, never heard of Stat before. I could read it fine, no paywall, not sure maybe geographic or just hitting different users :shrug:
Sabinus 7 months ago Interesting, I didn't get that prompt. Read the whole thing fine, no login. OJFord 7 months ago Yup, same, hence my (oh so offensive, apparently) comment asking the reason, assuming it must be something else.
OJFord 7 months ago Yup, same, hence my (oh so offensive, apparently) comment asking the reason, assuming it must be something else.
OJFord 7 months ago Nope, never heard of Stat before. I could read it fine, no paywall, not sure maybe geographic or just hitting different users :shrug:
southernplaces7 7 months ago Lucky you, was paywalled for me. Good thing they posted the link. OJFord 7 months ago Ok, yeah, great, I didn't hit that so I was just curious why they did, thinking must be some other reason.
OJFord 7 months ago Ok, yeah, great, I didn't hit that so I was just curious why they did, thinking must be some other reason.
OJFord 7 months ago Bloody hell, I was only curious! It wasn't paywalled for me, I read it no problem.
burnt-resistor 7 months ago Paywalled. OJFord 7 months ago Wasn't for me, as I said. burnt-resistor 7 months ago No worries. Must be some regional weirdness. US here. VPN or EU over there? 1 reply →
OJFord 7 months ago Wasn't for me, as I said. burnt-resistor 7 months ago No worries. Must be some regional weirdness. US here. VPN or EU over there? 1 reply →
burnt-resistor 7 months ago No worries. Must be some regional weirdness. US here. VPN or EU over there? 1 reply →
Perhaps you are logged in with a "STAT Account"? When I load the link, it prompts me to create one in order to view the article.
Interesting, I didn't get that prompt. Read the whole thing fine, no login.
Yup, same, hence my (oh so offensive, apparently) comment asking the reason, assuming it must be something else.
Nope, never heard of Stat before. I could read it fine, no paywall, not sure maybe geographic or just hitting different users :shrug:
Lucky you, was paywalled for me. Good thing they posted the link.
Ok, yeah, great, I didn't hit that so I was just curious why they did, thinking must be some other reason.
Bloody hell, I was only curious! It wasn't paywalled for me, I read it no problem.
Paywalled.
Wasn't for me, as I said.
No worries. Must be some regional weirdness. US here. VPN or EU over there?
1 reply →
paywalled for me too
Wasn't for me, as I said.