The site, not the paper, got posted. If the site shouldn't count, maybe we shouldn't post paper summary sites? Even though lay-person/marketing summaries of pa

The site, not the paper, got posted. If the site shouldn't count, maybe we shouldn't post paper summary sites? Even though lay-person/marketing summaries of papers, and popular reporting summaries very often mess up academic results, or even just leave out details, personally I feel like having some hidden requirement to read through and understand the complete academic sources behind any article is onerous and might be unreasonable, especially if the paper is technical and inaccessible to a lay audience. I appreciate it when someone like @kryogen1c recognizes and admits their gut reaction was based on incomplete information, that's as valuable to me as hearing comments that research and understand the sources.