The article you link to has nothing to do with one-year Admiral's Club memberships. It's about unlimited AAirpasses, something AA stopped selling decades ago.
(With the Admiral's Club membership, you have to assign a name to the membership, and you can only show up there if you look like the person on a photo id with that name. So there is very little abuse and you can go as much as you want.)
Adding a /s to a non-sarcastic comment doesn't make it sarcastic. If that were true, people would add a /G to signify that their comment was a great work of literary art. For something to be great, it has to be great. For something to be sarcastic, it needs, at the very least, some snark.
Also, this isn't Reddit. Just write what you mean.
I did write what I meant, that the gift of just a one day pass is much less impressive than the way this post was titled originally. (Hint: it didn't say one day pass)
I then finished off my comment with a sarcastic remark, which you did not understand and proceeded to stew over for multiple days. Lol! /G
His comment was perfectly clear, enjoyable, valuable, relevant, and came with a link to a great article.
The fact that you're insulting him for his valuable and interesting contribution is an outrage. Why don't you go pick on someone else, someone who doesn't contribute, who doesn't post great links, who doesn't have an entertaining style.
Not everyone has to be a robotic autistic technical writer on this casual internet forum.
Posts should be judged by their content and style. Your nerdy hatred toward the colloquial /s tag comes off as dry, dweebish, vindictive pedantry.
I'm aware that you represent the HN Zeitgeist to some extent but that pretty much just exemplifies the problem here. You're engaging in the "automatic middle brow dismissal" that pg has identified as majorly obnoxious.
You think sarcasm tags are "too urban" for HN. How fucking classy of you. /s
I really appreciate the critique from someone who's had an account for two days. The personal attacks were an added plus. And, I like how you didn't actually read any of the thread you're replying to.
Nice work. A+, would read again!
(See how I wrote a sarcastic post without needing a "/s" tag? The written word is pretty cool!)
The parent's point was that AA has a bad track record for honoring their deals. The linked article was fascinating and shows how, if the contract/promotion/product they owe you is used too much despite not violating any of the terms, they will still go after you.
AA advertised a lifetime of free flight. They made people pay a lot of money for it. The users weren't abusing it. They were operating according to the terms they signed up for and indeed paid top dollar for. Despite not breaking any rules, AA still revoked their access to the service the customers paid for.
The parent's comment totally applies. The subjects in the article were not abusing the system. AA was abusing the system.
(With the Admiral's Club membership, you have to assign a name to the membership, and you can only show up there if you look like the person on a photo id with that name. So there is very little abuse and you can go as much as you want.)