Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test

I am doing neither of those things. I said it was tempting, because it puts things I've read about G-WAN into perspective (the claims I saw some time back when I was shown a heads-up versus nginx were questionable, and it's an interesting data point). That's why it's an unrelated addendum, and it's completely unrelated to the blog post at all.

I have no desire to discredit someone I have never met and whose name I do not know, much like I have no desire to have my intentions explained to me by a Hacker News commenter. I wrote, quite clearly, that I wasn't doing something. To directly assert that I am in fact doing that thing and then ascribe further malice to it is to challenge my honesty and integrity, and I'd appreciate if you'd not do that in the future because you've never met me and know nothing about me.

There is an interpretation of my first bullet that would support your conclusion, but I only put down my first bullet to establish relevance in the comment, not to connect the two things.

Do you really think there's no such thing as a simple observation without intent? I'm not allowed to find it odd that a Web site about a Web server operated by the same Web server went down under a Web load, and remark upon it yet stop short of drawing or stating a conclusion because I don't have all the facts? How many times do I have to say that I have no intent, here? Apply Occam and cui bono. I don't even bloody know who the person is. What is my incentive to disparage him or her? What do I gain from that? Why would I resort to questionable, politically-charged rhetoric to tear someone down who I literally didn't know existed four hours ago? Is it really more likely that I'm out to get him or her?

Maybe the datacenter burned to the ground. I don't know everything so I'm not going to conclude what's happened, just that I find it odd it's been hard down for several hours now. It's interesting, and it's oddly characteristic of this community to infer that I have malicious intent simply for observing something and finding it interesting.

There are many unkind interpretations of the blog post and I felt I did a pretty good job with restraint in the section even before the additional addendum. I didn't have a lot of sympathy. I didn't accuse the author of lying, or making shit up, or any sort of malicious behavior even before the evil addendum that everybody hates (and many, many non-gray comments nearby have done just that). Why would I suddenly change gears and attempt to destroy a reputation?

I am aware people are inundated with rhetoric like this in several forms of media due to the current political climate and other factors, but Jesus, people really need to put their knives away and start challenging their assumptions of the worst in people or we are all royally fucked. That's letting the rhetorical climate win. Occam: I'm a shady person not-so-subtly and rather hamfistedly deploying rhetorical tactics to destroy someone's reputation simply for blogging about the Google interview process, or I'm just a random dude typing things as I find them interesting. Your pick.