Meanwhile there are few mechanisms to popularize the results of standards groups aside from occasional sexed up vendor blog posts (for example, CloudFlare are great at these). I see no problem with this extra visibility, and find it quite perplexing that someone would have reason to complain about it.
If you're expecting to get any value from this hacker news story, you need to understand enough of how the IETF works to know what meaning this particular draft has as opposed to any of the previous 6 revisions.
Seven, or, depending on how you squint, eight :D
Draft numbering starts from zero: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-esni-00
And also the number resets if (as happened in this case) a draft is adopted by a Working Group and acquires that "ietf" in place of an author's name, so the predecessor to that zero zero draft was ekr's draft-rescorla-tls-esni-00.
This Internet Draft was formally adopted by the TLS working group in 2018.
If you have valuable technical input for this work, or indeed any of TLS, you should subscribe to the TLS working group, familiarise yourself with the culture and pitch in - but there doesn't seem to any particular reason it's more relevant to Hacker News today than last week or next month.