> For the most part, the actual accusations are false. This submission was an earlier version of pgrust 0.4 called pgrust 0.4-preview.

This is a non-sequitur. It doesn't matter what the earlier version is called. It is what you submitted, and it is what the accusations are against. You don't get to create a new submission that (allegedly) fixes all of the issues and then say that the previous accusations are "false". Downplaying the issues by calling it a 'preview' when you submitted it yourself is also a bit of having your cake and eating it too, don't you think?

> ClickBench has no rules about how much SQL you need to support.

It is because of people like you that we have warnings not to eat tide pods, Jesus Christ.

> This submission was an earlier version of pgrust 0.4 called pgrust 0.4-preview

That statement provided context and was not part of the defense. The point was that -preview didn't have the issues described, except for limited SQL support.