Since you're going on the offensive, a defensive move might be in order: no, I wasn't. I said "odds are", not "DDG does", because I didn't know for sure and did not intend to claim to. The odds are in my favor, the fact is an aberration on otherwise almost-uniform behavior by search providers.
The odds would have been in your favor if you have said "odds are a search engine chosen at random does this too".
But, instead, you said: "odds are DDG does this too", thus binding the odds to DDG.
Since the general stance of DDG is pro privacy, you should have reasoned that the odds were in favor of DDG NOT doing this.
(Not to mention that posting that you "were close" didn't provide anything to the discussion --apart from some ill-conceived face saving from your part).
I used it to say "thanks", which was the primary reason for me. The rest was perhaps ill-conceived, but it has been amusing to see the spikes up and down in its rank - it went > +10 for a while.