>
There was a big long thread about this yesterday. Also, it's not cool to go into a preemptive sweary rant on your own submission.Says who? Because, if anything, HN users seem to agreed with and voted for my comment (or "rant").
>Finally HN guidelines are that you should be selective about the quality of your submission; 'topinfopost.com' is a news aggregator (bad) that's chock full of conspiracy theories (worse). Other front page store is include photographs of ghosts and that the civil war in Syria is a Zionist plot. Seriously? This is your idea of a reliable news source?
I don't follow topinfopost, and could not care less what else it has on it, as long as the story I submitted is OK. Which is. You can corroborate it in other, no conspiracy outlets.
Not to mention that some of the very same issues emerged in the well known Aaron Swartz case -- and your arguments here are so generic that they also trivialise that instance of prosecutorial abuse.
>Stop wasting our time with this bullshit. The maximum penalty for vandalism in California (which is what this case is about) is 3 years. It isn't possible to get a 13 year sentence for vandalism in California.
Which is beside the point. You shouldn't be threatened with outrageous charges in the first place, no matter what you will actually get.