if you think i am defending microsoft, your hatred has blinded you to what my comments are actually saying.

Why would I think that? That isn't a sensible conclusion from what I posted. I think you replied to the wrong post

Regardless of what the maintainer says of their abuser after being abused, the point I think you are getting stuck on is this:

Creating a system which locks you out if you don't speak to a human isn't de-facto malicious.

Having support where you can't speak to a human isn't de-facto malicious, either.

Doing both at the same time, however, is de-facto malicious. Some executives likely got bonuses for doing it, too.

▲

john_strinlai 4 hours ago | parent [-]

you said "hostage speaks well of hostage-taker" in response to my comment.

i interpreted that as you saying i am the hostage of microsoft, and have stockholm syndrome, therefor am speaking well of (defending) microsoft.

if i misinterpreted that, my bad. are you calling jason the hostage?

▲

ImPostingOnHN 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, the maintainer continues to be held hostage by Microsoft, so it is no surprise that they don't publicly denounce Microsoft or ascribe ill intent or in any way speak ill of Microsoft.

	▲	john_strinlai 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		my bad for misinterpreting your comment.