I'm willing to accept that if you have more than an anecdote to support your position?
2. derpmeister has a month-old HN account, which is backed up by/linked to nothing else.
3. (for example) If Linus Torvalds had posted what derpmeister had, I would be more inclined to take it at face value.
4. derpmeister's post automatically takes itself into 'troll' territory by starting off with the 'Blizzard apologist' comments. This makes the anecdote seem less believable without anything else to back it up.
Sure, it's not a deductive proof that Blizzard is right and derpmeister is wrong, but it would be unreasonable to require such a thing.