I kinda read this as a stream of consciousness post about what happened. In that context, it's more an expression of astonishment that that actually happened than boasting or anything.

FWIW, I had something kind of similar happen to me a couple years ago. I posted an open letter [0] to a famous politician in my state, shared it on Facebook and Twitter as I do with all my posts, and went to bed. Overnight, it went viral and I woke up to an email box full of messages, tons of mentions on various social media outlets and a couple of phone calls from newspapers and TV stations wanting interviews.

The next few days were pretty crazy. More than anything, it was just a shocking experience to realize that that many people actually cared. I imagine he's had a similar experience. And, in fact, I wrote a follow up post [1] a week or so later rather similar to his.

So yeah, I just read this as a guy who's shocked that the world cared what happened to him. I wouldn't read more into it than a guy who's grateful that that many people took notice.

[0] http://www.robpeck.com/2015/06/an-open-letter-to-roy-moore/

[1] http://www.robpeck.com/2015/07/what-happens-when-your-post-g...

Kudos to you that is one heck of an argument and laid out in a way that it is impossible to refute. Scary thought: those people that function as enablers of people in power with detestable views are always ready to jump forward, no matter how dirty the deed that needs doing.

My guess is that he is pointing out the Streisand effect which is his only avenue for revenge against the opaque USA bureaucracy.

I don't think it was necessary or added any value to his story, but it would've been noticeable and of interest to him so maybe he thought it was relevant in describing the attention/support he'd felt. In the absence of any reasoning regarding the ESTA denial, maybe any detail he could add seemed warranted?

He's a programmer who probably spends a lot of time looking at data. It's an understandable frame of reference for someone trying to make sense of a stressful situation (especially when the media has brought attention to it).

> By the end of the Tuesday, I had about 2000 new followers

That's the only time he mentioned a number of followers.

"Several well-followed people retweeted me and that caused even more new followers and replies."

"By the end of the Tuesday, I had about 2000 new followers and twitter notifications that literally were flying by at a high speed."

"I’m now (end of Wednesday, 60 hours since the check-in counter) at 3000 more twitter followers than what I started out with this Monday morning."

Two direct references to a count, one indirect reference.

He's really just chronicling what happened while expressing astonishment at the traction the story got (and the consequences thereof).

Oh, I know it, and I'm sure I would've felt similar in his position. I just responded to the previous comment so that other people wouldn't have to go back to the article to see if they'd misread something, the way that I did.

> Was it really necessary for him to refer to his Twitter follower count so many times?

I was wondering about the same thing. Sounds like "Twitter Humblebrag" * to me....

> I’m now (end of Wednesday, 60 hours since the check-in counter) at 3000 more twitter followers than what I started out with this Monday morning. This turned out to be a totally crazy week and it has severally impacted my productivity. I need to get back to write code, I’m getting behind!

* = http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=humblebrag

If the creator of cURL wants to brag, I doubt it's going to be about his Twitter follower count.