200 visits is just a small slice of HN users and reflect a response to the title of the article, not the quality of the article itself.
Anecdote is not evidence, but the article wasn't compelling enough that I would be likely to upvote it - upvotes are the only thing that keeps new stories from being buried and flagging only comes into play once a recent story gets upvotes.
New articles get just one point all the time - indeed I've seen cases where a story had no votes or comments the first time it was posted only to make the front page and generate lively discussion when reposted later with a slightly different URL.
Odds are that any new article will be ignored. A conspiracy is not necessary - and since the article was buried by a lack of points and the weight of time, it's hard to believe that there was one.
Consider it editorial feedback in regards to style, timing and relevance.