Alan Coopersmith wrote: > James Carlson wrote: > >> [Removed website-discuss; it's not really their problem.] >> You can even trigger the mechanism by saying something like "I don't >> think this should be conXXXXfidential" or "that's not a propriZZZZetary >> idea." >> > > In this case, the opinion.ms had the P word left in the comment that > tells you to uncomment that line it if the notice of secrecy is needed. > I just inserted a "." in the middle of the word to match the other occurances > in the comments there so hopefully it will appear in the next push. > > Well, thanks muchly for the help, folks.
It appears that the good deed punishment continues. Apparently, "opinion.ms" is an ignorable file. I can see I have clearly wasted all that time learning how to work with the native template and tools of the community. I could guess as to whether it's the full file name or simply the extension which causes the behavior, but that's not exactly an effective way to contribute (guessing at hidden requirements). I'll follow up with the website community to attempt to emancipate the secret requirements.
