4 ms·
... and that's potentially a good reason not to post the link again here at the moment. You (by which I mean user duck) might consider redacting it. Please.
by RiderOfGiraffes 16y ago
... and that's potentially a good reason not to post the link again here at the moment. You (by which I mean user duck) might consider redacting it. Please.
- cma 16y agoAnd screw over the acquirers? Clannish mentality...
- gommm 16y agoIt's not a question of screwing over the acquirers, it's just that in that case the acquirer had much more experience and could easily use the information they could get from the discussion to their advantage
- mattmanser 16y agoIt's not duck who's made the booboo but Jacques. It's trivially easy to find even without the link because he posted the exact title. Google the title, lots of direct links. Probably easy to find the actual post on some archive too.
- duck 16y agoI just got back on here and can no longer edit the comment. If I could, I would remove the link, but I have always found it kind of silly to "delete" things from the web like this or not link to it when in reality it still exists. It gives a false sense of privacy and just in general breaks things.