That’d be sensible reasoning IF the articles were already posted with a paywall-free url, but they are not, so as it stands these are essentially just ads.

▲

creatonez 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

IIRC the staff will usually intentionally elevate bypass links to the top whenever they see them posted in the comments. (And when a link has already been posted they tend to sink comments like yours that complain without providing a link, lol)

▲

kdkdkdkwkd 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Again, why not require the bypassed link right from the gate, then? You’d sidestep people complaining about it and wouldn’t little the comment section with people posting alternative links or asking for them.

NYT is the only one profiting getting free publicity for their subscription service here.

	▲	Aquitard 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Did you create three accounts just to reply? And if so why not stick to just one?
	▲	gumby 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I speculated in a different reply that it’s to reduce dups. Two people could post the same article, but if they used different paywall-bypassers they would appear as separate submissions.

▲

gumby 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

My understanding is you’re not supposed to post paywall-cutting links but it’s ok to post them as comments. Perhaps to prevent dupes? Or perhaps there is no such rule.