[jdiff]

There's a footnote indicated by the superscript 1 in your quote:

> ¹ Follow-up 2: Yes, I know that the Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse was not the result of resonance, but I felt I had to drop the reference to forestall the “You forgot to mention the Tacoma Narrows Bridge!” comments.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't, and damned if you do both, even.

[necovek]

Considering "follow-up" wording, it might have been added later, and might not really be true — but the important thing is that there is a correction now.

So it's good a commenter here posted about it, because this might have led to the clarification being put in in the first place.

[kaycebasques]

Follow-Up 2 has been there since at least Dec 2022: https://web.archive.org/web/20221231143310/https://devblogs....

[necovek]

Thanks for confirming that.

[jdiff]

The commenter quoted a section of text that included a reference (the mentioned superscript 1) to the footnote, it was already there.

[ptero]

It's closer to "damned if you knowingly make grossly incorrect statements even if you put a small footnote saying OK, I know it is not correct". And damned right that you are damned in this case :)

I would much prefer a reference to the event with the clarification, in the same paragraph, that it is due to a different phenomenon. My 2c.

[lelandfe]

Think I missed the grossly incorrect part