3 ms·
Nope, you were just plain wrong. The odds would have been in your favor if you have said "odds are a search engine chosen at random does this too". But, inste
by foljs 16y ago
Nope, you were just plain wrong.
The odds would have been in your favor if you have said "odds are a search engine chosen at random does this too".
But, instead, you said: "odds are DDG does this too", thus binding the odds to DDG.
Since the general stance of DDG is pro privacy, you should have reasoned that the odds were in favor of DDG NOT doing this.
(Not to mention that posting that you "were close" didn't provide anything to the discussion --apart from some ill-conceived face saving from your part).
- Groxx 16y agoIt bound the odds to DDG in the face of a lack of information, where you can only extrapolate from what you know - other search providers. It would've bound straight to DDG if I knew one way or another, but I didn't. Context is very important for such phrasing. I used it to say "thanks", which was the primary reason for me. The rest was perhaps ill-conceived, but it has been amusing to see the spikes up and down in its rank - it went > +10 for a while.