Ah, a list of unreviewed books with what appear to be affiliate links.
Can you be more specific? I don't see where it fails to meet site guidelines. If you can point it out, I'd be happy not to do it again. I'm the last person who would want to start polluting the site.
Perhaps you found my post displeasing or distasteful. If so, then don't upvote it. But as far as I can tell, it meets site guidelines, and I'm happy to change my behavior if it didn't.
There's a difference between flaggable and just not-so-good. Thank goodness we're still allowed to post things that aren't-so-good. That's the whole reason to have a voting system, right?
Trust me, there are a hell of a lot of articles that make and stay on the front page that I don't particularly like, and a lot of them get there because they are submitted by a popular person or contain some kind of popular link-bait (Apple, Google, YC, etc) I don't particularly like it, and I complain about it from time to time, but it's just part of the way the site works. All I ask is that other folks remember that one person's bad article is another person's great piece of news, and use the flagging system sparingly.
Make a throw-away account just to harass people? Really classy. If you've got something nasty to say why not just do it as yourself?
I don't care that because of your comment my article was flagged. Been flagged before and I'll be flagged again.
But it interests me that you seem to be trying to make a point with such a new account. If so, what is it? I blogged to tell folks to pull their heads out of tech and go read some fun books. It wasn't supposed to be a list of book reviews. The affiliate links were clearly marked, and if you don't want to buy something, don't buy it. Nobody is making you. Google is your friend.
As much as I could give a shit, I just wonder why you had to be that way. It was a good message, one people needed to hear, perhaps poorly delivered, but for some reason you thought it deserved a snide response.
Why?