[rvz]

I already gave the solution years ago [0] and each time GitHub goes down, hundreds of comments continue to complain when the solution is right in front of their eyes.

> i am amazed @dang is ok with that, it seem completely deranged man, borderline harassment

What harassment exactly? That whatever helpful advice I said in [0] and not 'centralizing everything to GitHub' seems to have aged well?

There is nothing 'deranged' about explaining preventative solutions like 'self-hosting' to those still using an unreliable service. In fact, it is more 'deranged' to believe that GitHub has gotten any more reliable after Microsoft acquired it.

You can continue to use GitHub's services, but don't complain when something from GitHub goes down again in less than a months time when the solution has been in front of you for years.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22867803

[throwusawayus]

i pointed out no one in THIS THREAD said anything about “all in on github” and you replied linking to different thread from TWO YEARS AGO. deranged!

who else posts i-told-you-so’s hundreds of times for two years shouting to void? is madness!

>> it is more 'deranged' to believe that GitHub has gotten any more reliable after Microsoft acquired it.

ok? and who in THIS THREAD is saying anything remotely like that?

>> You can continue to use GitHub's services, but don't complain when something from GitHub goes down again

i dont use githubs services, where did i say i do?

i have not conplained about github going down

who are you responding to??!?? comments makes no sense, derangement!!!

[rvz]

Seems like you're the one that is showing signs of 'derangement' and episodes of 'madness'. I'm just laughing at you and also at the ones that still continue to rely on a service that evidently goes down each month with the solution given to them, years ago.

> ok? and who in THIS THREAD is saying anything remotely like that?

Whatever someone said about exactly “all in on github” verbaitim is a 'minute detail' you decided to focus on to deliberately miss the forrest for the trees and to make an excuse for an argument. I also include using any of GitHub's services, which as the evidence suggests is beyond poor and comes with folks here complaining about them. Especially GitHub Actions.

So you attempting to narrow the scope to who said what verbaitim from the start is essentially missing the wider point. In fact, it is a distraction, derailing the general and entire point of GitHub's years of unreliability.

> who are you responding to??!?? comments makes no sense, derangement!!!

So far, you for showing yourself as a prime example fitting the definition of 'derangement' and to everyone else who is complaining about GitHub going down despite its track record, assuming you have read the links. There's no need for you to continue embarrassing yourself here and in your next reply, since you continue screaming and 'shouting' in caps-lock whilst attempting to put forward distractions that fails to address the main issue of GitHub's history of downtime and incidents.

[throwusawayus]

you are spending time creating multi-year linked list of hn comments every single time a website you dislike and dont use goes down

i am “failing to address main issue of github’s downtime history”? indeed sure i am not addressing this, because it is not my care to address! why care when website i dont use and dont like goes down? not my problem!

do you see anyone else on entire hn creating redundant toplevel comments that then link to previous comment on same topic, spanning hundreds of comments across multiple years, all to post told-you-so to some random other commenters from 2-3 years ago? no one else do this, is deranged!