Ah. Yes, we agree: odds are, my comment won’t end up helping anyone. But it does no harm, either.

But also comments so unlikely to be relevant are usually frowned upon.

It’s valid, helpful, and statistically unlikely to reach anyone who needs to read it.

Statistically unlikely to be seen is the case for almost every comment I make, because that’s how I enjoy participating here at HN. The rest of the commenters have “statistically likely” covered! No need for me to pile on.

So I look for the odd weird corners and note them and earn a mix of “Whoah”, “No you’re wrong”, and “Sure but so what”. I’m cool with that :)

You're supposed to make all of your comments statistically likely to be relevant. White noise is bad.

And the warning you gave wasn't exactly going to be helpful to anyone else.

The exact wording in the guidelines that I’m adhering to is:

> Have curious conversation

There is no guideline directing me to make my comments relevant to the majority of HN readers. This is probably the most narrowly-focused HN comment I’ve ever made in a decade, though!

It’s neither offtopic nor generic, as it’s focused on the exact post topic at hand, and it says something odd but useful that no one else is saying. That’s the essence of what every HN comment should be.

And what you said wasn't useful.

We already established that the opsec scenario was so unlikely as to not matter for that particular poster. And for everyone else "you, specific person, under an extremely unlikely guess, should not be posting on HN" is not a useful post.