Dustin Curtis' "response to the critcism" in that second link consists of: 1. Quoting a well-articulated email from yet another reader who felt deceived by the

Dustin Curtis' "response to the critcism" in that second link consists of: 1. Quoting a well-articulated email from yet another reader who felt deceived by the trickery; and, 2. (After a preface stating how he finds it amusing that so many people are bothered about this button) The following high-level technical overview of what happens behind the scenes when someone's kudos are volunteered willy-nilly: Here’s what it actually does: when you hover over the button, a CSS transform animation is activated which fills the circle. After 1 second (the length of the animation), it fires a request to the server which increments an otherwise meaningless number by exactly one. This is the full extent of his response. As far as I could figure out, this "response to criticism" addresses the following introductory paragraph of his interlocutor's email: I was curious about the Kudos button you mention in your http://dcurt.is/web-standards article. I hovered over it with my mouse pointer, and then it said “don’t move”. I didn’t move. Then it said “sent”. Apparently someone invented a button that does not need to be pressed in order to be triggered. And totally ignores the sentiment communicated by the more weighty second paragraph which concludes with: I very humbly request that you kindly decrement the Kudos statistic by one unit in order to compensate for the one that I definitely did not intend to send until it was forcefully withdrawn from me by a deceitful human interface. Did Dustin Curtis really miss the subtle (svbtle?) sarcasm of that first paragraph, or am I just imagining things?