I don't think it's necessary to be this combative, and I think it's responses like these that encourage people to never admit any wrong on the internet. HN typically _tries_ to be above this.
I didn't try to suppress any articles, but I do encourage you to suppress your anger, because, it's probably not worth it :)
I was firm but not out of hate. I was hoping that you'd take it as a lesson learned whether you would publicly admit to that or not. It's admirable that you did. We all make mistakes and we're not static creatures.
This conversation is progress.
Further, I'm dutch and from the 80s. This would actually be my most well-behaved mild tone on a good day. A special adaptation for HN.
Since I may have you emotionally captive here, I'm really curious:
What is your strategy for separating interesting wheat from flamebait chaff? I try to do my "due diligence" but it is exhausting and frequently frustrating to follow what appears to be clickbait and see where it lands. But I'm a'merican zoomer so maybe that's, just, not my vibe, or whatever.
"The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling" seems to qualify as clickbait, it's title is intended to provoke, while reading the podcast episode summaries it seems to be well researched and interesting. I admit, I did not research it beyond the provocative title and that most other articles on the site are ideological flamebait.
It's usually not worth it. And this equally applies to publications with a left-liberal bent, like say the Washington Post. I appreciate the rec, though.