[dang]

No one connecting via a logged-in browser would have been blocked by this code.

Edit: there are two exceptions—accounts we blocked because they were running crawlers that didn't respect HN's robots.txt—but both have been blocked for much longer than a few days.

[fragmede]

In this post* Hector Martin makes a contradicting claim - that he's blocked using a logged in browser.

* https://social.treehouse.systems/@marcan/111165508206292497

Based on other posts in that thread though, he also appears to be behind CG-NAT, which is always a confounding factor for IP-based blocking. Maybe someone else on his netblock is running that crawler.

[dang]

If someone wants to tell me the username, I'd be happy to look into what happened. Without the username, I don't know of any way to check this particular case—all I can say is what changed during those few days, and what changed is that we blocked more IPs that were making logged-out requests; logged-in requests would not have been affected.

Since that link refers to opening HN in an incognito window—and all those requests would be logged-out—most probably it was that activity that triggered the block. As I think I said elsewhere, it's hard to distinguish between a legit user accessing a bunch of HN links in various tabs, and a distributed botnet making similar handfuls of requests from a million different IP addresses.

What I can tell you for sure, though, is that the claim that we were targeting any individual user is quite false. Isn't that the main point?