[batista]

>You kind of lost me when you started telling me that I should consider useless the same things you consider useless.

Well, other people sometimes are in the right on telling you to consider useless what they consider useless. For example, if someone tells you to consider "creationism" useless, they would be right. It's not like everything is a matter of personal choice --or that they just say it to impose their arbitrary opinion.

Same here, it's not like anybody else would have found the "url/title mismatch as a reason NOT to read an article" reasonable.

(We've ventured too far off into off-topic land, but what the hell)

>I'm just glad that the OP gave an actual answer... rather than just ridicule me.

And doesn't he being that kind make you regret suggesting people drop his article for a trivial typo?

[jack-r-abbit]

> And doesn't he being that kind make you regret suggesting people drop his article for a trivial typo?

If I had actually suggested that people not read the article then, yes, I would regret that. Fortunately, I did not do that. Instead I said why I did not read the article. Perhaps you find that distinction trivial. That is fine. But I do not.