[predictabl3]

The notion that this is poisoning the well is also supported by the general pattern: retreating on an idea that others thought was bad, avoiding literally any discussion of the technical/cultural criticism (despite that it apparently still existed legitimately enough to postpone the proposal for now) and 2/3rd or more of the post spent implying that [all|some|who knows] of the opponents were abusive bullies, and that maybe the idea was actually fine. (Setting the stage to absolutely re-introduce with the new framing "inauthentic traffic" in 6 months.)

Note also, avoiding any discussion of the web open or how it entered into the decision to postpone, supposedly. Though, that also wasn't said, just sort of implied with the half-hearted smiley-faced plea for compromising.

I am not emotionally invested because I see this as inevitable and don't care, I'll go live in the woods soon anyway, but this is just icky to read.