These downvotes for sho seem to be done more along the lines of "let's downvote the heretic who doesn't love github" than actually being related to the arguments made. IMHO.
If I end up with a minus five too, I guess I was right :P
It's because the original comment only complained about Github, without adding to the discussion of the link.
The other Github bashing didn't even make sense. Github offering personal websites doesn't expose them to any more risk of bandwidth issues. Someone can already make a public repository full of 50MB files that can be downloaded by anyone. Having a lightweight interface that lets you display HTML files in your repository doesn't change that.
It didn't complain about github. It raised an interesting discussion about github's business model. But you're right: it was not adding to the discussion of the link.
No it's for sho making a poor assumption: that github's directly running the site (e.g. by its own employees) instead of a github user running the site.
