[rebeccaskinner]

I shared the story as I remember it. Memory is imperfect. It's been years since I deleted my account, and I don't have the luxury of access to server or moderation logs.

What I do remember unambiguously is being an active member of the site, contributing regularly and in good faith, being accused of spamming, and the general feeling of hostility that I got from the site.

[pushcx]

You got a DM and email with the title and URL when your story was removed. This would've been 2023-08-03 with the subject "Your story has been edited by a moderator", if you want to look back: https://github.com/lobsters/lobsters/blob/86e1d0b6ac6bac5210...

But you're correct on the second part, there isn't a level of activity that entitles anyone to post a sales page with nothing to discuss on it. Your activity was taken into account, though. Typically if a new user's first activity is to post an ad I'll also ban the site or user. I understand the rules aren't as permissive as you wanted, but ads don't start good discussions.

[hitekker]

Your post title doesn't sound like spam to me. Moreover, the link you originally shared https://pragprog.com/titles/rshaskell/effective-haskell/ looks informative enough for discussion; it links to PDFs of the actual content to read. HN, for example, didn't delete it when you posted it https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36987260

IMO, the lobste.rs admin's assertion that the post had "nothing to discuss" is a misjudgment that undercuts the rest of their rationalization. My guess is that they're looking for a win on technicality, instead of addressing the myriad of concerns raised elsewhere in this thread.

[pushcx]

The link was https://effective-haskell.com/

[hitekker]

That website was actually https://web.archive.org/web/20230804152033/https://effective... back in 2023. Even less sale-sy than the HN link.

I don't think the technical win you want is possible or even worth it.

[pushcx]

I don't know why you think I want a "technical win" from you, but I'm not seeking your approval. I corrected your mistake about the URL and the policy, like I corrected the author's mistake about what I removed. If you and other sites prefer different policies, it's no skin off my nose.