Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by keepupnow 27 days ago
Yes they definitely did that. Find evidence to the contrary.
1 comments
no-name-here 27 days ago
Is this sarcasm? Or are you saying that the onus of providing proof is not on the those making the claim, but instead that the onus of proof is on those who did not make the claim?
link
baobabKoodaa 27 days ago
You don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to draw that conclusion.
link
snvzz 27 days ago
Sure you can provide an alternative explanation?

Otherwise, that's the best we have.

link
no-name-here 26 days ago
> Sure you can provide an alternative explanation?

In terms of a possible explanation for why GitLab would take an action, was it considered whether the (disturbed?) user violated GitLab's Terms of Service? Is the assumption that GitLab didn't just enforce their ToS, but that they're instead more likely to be secretly acquiescing to backroom bullying between companies over specific users?

link
akerl_ 26 days ago
It seems clear that the Bitbucket devs paid bribes to Gitlab to ban this user to drum up anti-GitHub sentiment.
link