> HN's editorialised version does not say that. True, "on record" was elided, but nor does it say "ever". And given the readership of HN I doubt it was done fo

> HN's editorialised version does not say that. True, "on record" was elided, but nor does it say "ever". And given the readership of HN I doubt it was done for sensationalist purposes, purely space-saving. > So the problem is? None, that I can see - it was you that claimed the headline was "factually incorrect".