← Back to context Comment by verdverm 4 months ago Maybe they shouldn't have been so snarky? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46991274 3 comments verdverm Reply staticassertion 4 months ago This is a shameful equivocation. This is "be snarky, get publicly dox'd and harassed". verdverm 4 months ago I'm not sure which way you are implying here, what is shamefully equated? staticassertion 3 months ago The "snark" of opening the PR vs the "snark" of people dox'ing the guy who opened it.
staticassertion 4 months ago This is a shameful equivocation. This is "be snarky, get publicly dox'd and harassed". verdverm 4 months ago I'm not sure which way you are implying here, what is shamefully equated? staticassertion 3 months ago The "snark" of opening the PR vs the "snark" of people dox'ing the guy who opened it.
verdverm 4 months ago I'm not sure which way you are implying here, what is shamefully equated? staticassertion 3 months ago The "snark" of opening the PR vs the "snark" of people dox'ing the guy who opened it.
staticassertion 3 months 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.