The article was at #2 on the front page when I went to sleep last night, i.e. far from hidden, and we didn&#x27;t penalize it. (HN has a longstanding policy of penalizing stories less, not more, when they say something negative about YC or YC companies. That&#x27;s the first thing PG brought up when he taught me how to moderate the site.)<p>That doesn&#x27;t mean we turn off moderation altogether, though. Many commenters were pointing out that the article&#x27;s claims about wrongdoing exceeded the evidence it presented. In such cases it&#x27;s normal HN practice to replace a tendentious title with a more neutral and accurate one, preferably using representative language from the article. We do this routinely.<p>A good title on HN is accurate and neutral. A bad title is misleading or linkbait. In my view the article&#x27;s title was linkbait (making a juicy claim of wrongdoing and a reference to &quot;The Facts&quot; as if there is one set of Facts and they know what it is). If people feel strongly about this I&#x27;m happy to change it back, but this title replacement is so standard and the current title so much more factual that it would clearly be a breach of normal practice to do so.