Well you've certainly convinced me that this is a drama that I will never rightly apprehend—it's like looking into a kaleidoscope while on acid. But does that mean the post should be taken down? I'm not sure. A post being on HN's front page does doesn't imply either that it's true or that we're in any way officially condoning it. At most it implies that there's an interesting discussion to be had. If you want an official position, here's my take after a minute of skimming: there are at least two sides to every story, and I have no idea what really happened.

It's to be predicted that nearly everyone commenting will take a side based on their pre-existing view on the pre-existing issue. I say "nearly" for form's sake, but actually I'm not sure there is a single exception.

From an HN moderation point of view the question is whether the general phenomenon is interesting (there the answer is clearly yes, even if no one knows what to make of it) and whether the specific post can support a substantive discussion. On the latter point I'd say it's borderline.

Do you have something better to show harassment? That post doesn't appear to. As far as I can tell it's about an account that replied to people patting themselves on the back with clap symbols, which seems rather benign. Although I may just be too removed from twitter and people who use twitter culture to get it.

I don’t know about any of this drama but that post is unreadable. What is it actually saying? It spends like half the time talking about prior versions of itself with long detailed explanations of why it changed.

Seconded.