> I did, however, put a decent layer of sarcasm on it, because I wanted it to be funny, and I think the comedy was one of the main reasons it got so much attent

> I did, however, put a decent layer of sarcasm on it, because I wanted it to be funny, and I think the comedy was one of the main reasons it got so much attention. Sarcasm is not, in of itself, funny. Your post was certainly not funny. It was sardonic and overbearing. Your tone was only tolerable because your experience was interesting and not written up previously in a place like HN. If anything your post was modded up in part because of how enraged you sounded. Charlie Sheen doesn't get attention in his interviews because he's funny. He gets attention because he's unhinged, and everyone wants to watch the train-wreck unfold. (To be clear, my intent is not to compare you to Charlie Sheen, instead i think we should be very clear on what it was that was that media sources and the blogosphere thought was notable, in general, and in the specific case of your post, for better or worse)