← Back to context Comment by verdverm 10 days ago Maybe they shouldn't have been so snarky? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46991274 3 comments verdverm Reply staticassertion 9 days ago This is a shameful equivocation. This is "be snarky, get publicly dox'd and harassed". verdverm 8 days ago I'm not sure which way you are implying here, what is shamefully equated? staticassertion 6 days ago The "snark" of opening the PR vs the "snark" of people dox'ing the guy who opened it.
staticassertion 9 days ago This is a shameful equivocation. This is "be snarky, get publicly dox'd and harassed". verdverm 8 days ago I'm not sure which way you are implying here, what is shamefully equated? staticassertion 6 days ago The "snark" of opening the PR vs the "snark" of people dox'ing the guy who opened it.
verdverm 8 days ago I'm not sure which way you are implying here, what is shamefully equated? staticassertion 6 days ago The "snark" of opening the PR vs the "snark" of people dox'ing the guy who opened it.
staticassertion 6 days ago The "snark" of opening the PR vs the "snark" of people dox'ing the guy who opened it.
This is a shameful equivocation. This is "be snarky, get publicly dox'd and harassed".
I'm not sure which way you are implying here, what is shamefully equated?
The "snark" of opening the PR vs the "snark" of people dox'ing the guy who opened it.