Discussed at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2475854.
Is that not OK?
I didn't notice the second conversation. If I had, I'd probably not have re-posted it so soon.
Edit: Actually, I can't find the 2015 conversation in the search.
It seems the couple of mods have the power to change the placement of stories at will too, not sure, moderation is opaque here.
Well, I mean. Obviously I noticed that the first posting of the story had a very high upvote count. But I was going to post it anyway by that point (I got the story from another article I read today on HN, discussed in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16243067, and thought it would definitely be interesting).
I can see that being an exploitable tactic (search for very old articles with high number of votes) but not "by hand"- one would have to scrape HN for that sort of thing to work.
I digress- I don't know how I'd prove my post was "innocent". I do try to maximise my karma so the high upvote count on the original story was definitely a motive. I try to use karma as a guide for what to post. Not that it's working :)
Why?
To be precise, it's fine once more than a year has gone by since the last significant discussion. Otherwise we treat reposts as dupes: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html. But if a story hasn't had significant discussion yet, and it's particularly good, reposts are ok. Allowing good stories to have multiple chances at getting attention is a way to mitigate the randomness of what gets seen on the /newest page.