That's the problem with writing posts both of the "everyone else is doing things WRONG, those dang fools" (e.g. the series on RSS readers) and "oops, I did a stupid mistake, heh, TIL" styles and variety: the latter ones tend to attract comments from "The One" (oh noes) referencing the first kind of posts. Naturally, a humble person would simply read them, note them, and move on withouth replying — but a humble would person would not write the "everyone else is doing things WRONG, those dang fools" kind of posts either in the first place; and so we get the third kind of posts, the ones with "yeah, I did a small mistake, but I've admitted it myself, so no one else is allowed to criticize me; anyway..." disclaimer on the top.

P.S. I do distictly remember how a reply on HN to one of her earlier posts on RSS clients mentioned that her laments kinda miguided since her own feed doesn't set one very well-documented and basic cache-controlling HTTP header that most readers actually do respect; but some time later in her later post she described that header as matter-of-fact knowlewdge, no "I've learned about this one recently" remark or anything, and by that time, her RSS feed had started setting it.

Thanks, I missed it.

(I should note that in my crowd, references to this movie are always super-negative. "The One" gets damned to hell to eternally fight, but never win his battle.)

I'm not sure I understand the purpose of these blog posts for what is, at best, a simple bug in Debian. When I encounter something like this, I find steps to reproduce and file a bug. That's it.

If someone wants to get indignant and broadcast how terrible it is that a project (Debian in this case) is so terrible that they dare have a UX issue that is probably just an oversight, then they're entitled to do that but can also expect pushback where they aren't perfect either.