Don’t be ridiculous, dang. Requesting sources for an incredible and unsubstantiated claim is in no way “dismissive, hostile, and/or unsubstantive”.
> You've been doing it a lot
I don’t think so. Did you have some particular examples in mind?
> You've been doing it a lot
I don’t think so. Did you have some particular examples in mind?
>> we've had to ask you this multiple times before > Really? Name them.
Here are some cases:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20067517
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18580940
Which one? The one asking for a source on an incredible claim? That's not welcome on HN?
Regarding the cases you linked to, only the first and last are valid. The second and third (which are the same, so I have no idea why you posted two links) don't violate any HN guidelines, as a careful reading of the conversation would make obvious.
I'm also not ok with "Don't be ridiculous, dang"—responding to a request not to break the site guidelines by flagrantly breaking them again signals bad faith and a desire not to use the site as intended. If I were going strictly by probability, it would make the most sense to just ban you for that, because commenters who react that way almost never reform. I won't do that now, but please just correct how you're posting here. It isn't hard. All you have to do is take the site guidelines to heart and choose to practice them.
Another poor sign is that we've had this kind of conversation before. As I explained to you in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18581673, it's a poor use of our time and energy to play the cross-examination game with commenters who don't adhere to the guidelines and react with endless questions when we point that out. Users who do that nearly always turn out to be a liability for the community.
Also, notice how some of my comments are, without any valid reason, being falsely flagged and silently hidden from view. What do you make of that?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20379602
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20378337
I have no intention of emailing you to "appeal" this retaliatory ban, because you've made it clear that you will ban anyone for questioning the merit of your accusations. You've made a mockery of the HN moderation process.
Edit: you added your last paragraph after I posted that. Actually, we frequently unban people and are happy to, as long as we believe they'll follow the guidelines in the future. We don't ban people for asking questions—we spend countless hours answering them. What doesn't make sense is to play the infinite concern-troll game, which can easily suck all our resources away from the rest of the site. Since we've had these exchanges before with no effect and you've continued to break the site guidelines, I made that call. I believe that the bulk of the community understands why we have to do this, even if it means guessing wrong sometimes, and supports it as long as we're willing to correct mistakes.