[altmanaltman]

The comment is not based on Netflix or Stack Overflow. Just the person making the decision not having any consistent basis in their reasoning. There is a reason why they are self-admittedly not very good at their job.

I have explained it enough, not sure what you're missing at this point.

[thesz]

  > not sure what you're missing at this point.

We are talking with audience reading our comments. You think you are talking to me but you are talking to much wider audience.

Everyone, including me, are making some assumptions when we are writing something. When it is technical, it is easy to verify - obtain source code, run it, check results. When it is somewhat managerial, it is much harder to verify.

For example, original post emphasizing Stack Overflow being scaling monolith (pun intended) may refer to the point of time when SO were run by basically one man, yet scaling.

You dismiss it, that's okay. You do not answer my or OP points, that's okay too.

Our readers are smart enough to judge OP (and ours) points on their merits.

[altmanaltman]

> Our readers are smart enough to judge OP (and ours) points on their merits.

If we go solely by that criterion, the upvotes on the original comment do prove that people are smart enough to judge the points on their merits. It was good talking to you and to a much wider audience through you.