| I will reply only one more time, because this is genuine flamebait. > essentially because my comment was getting downvoted and people were disagreeing with me, you felt comfortable 1) starting off rudely ("this is such an awful take"), 2) overreaching from the established facts, and 3) being childish and accusatory when questioned my criticism of your acting in bad faith has nothing to do with the fact that others did as well. Pointing that out was an attempt to allow you to understand that you may be incorrect. as for overreaching or "being childish", that's unsubstantiated and imagined. >you accidentally imply that all the characters I list are implemented friend, I never did this, you simply misunderstood. You seem to have a problem with blaming others for your own mistakes. >you also claim this is a "well-established standard" - something easily disprovable - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29319221 - so unsurprising you refuse to defend it This is the definition of cherry-picking. The standard was established by several mail providers and is codified all over the web: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email_address#Local-part If a naive developer doesn't adhere to this established standard, it doesn't suddenly make it not a standard; the developer is not following it. The standard is set by the mail providers. > the way you act around people in positions of weakness is your real self This is an absurd statement. If you are feeling persecuted in the comments section of a thread about email standards, you might need to unplug for a while. "people in positions of weakness" lol, this is Hacker News, no one cares about downvotes. Please just back off of this conversation, this isn't something you need to "win" or something. You're arguing in bad faith, plain and simple. |
overreaching? who knows? but sadly I think we can substantiate "childish". and let's be real, how can we describe repeated ad hominems and unfounded accusations in place of actual discussion? bad faith flamebait