The thread started off with hnha asking, "why on earth is this a link to Facebook of all things?" followed by RexRollman responding, "I agree. I see Facebook in a URL and I won't visit it, regardless of what it is.", followed by you asking, "And why is that, exactly?". None of which were asking, "can I access this link without logging into facebook", so positing that the discussion can be ended simply because this link can be accessed is a non-sequitur.
Interestingly, in the same thread that hnha started, there is also a posting by brokenparser about NOT being able to access the linked content - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6228750 So, not only is your position a non-sequitur, it is also based on inconsistent evidence.
I appreciate your well-thought out reply, but I was simply referring to the tree of comments responding to my own original comment. Asserting that further discussion was (and is) moot was neither a non-sequitur nor based on inconsistent evidence.
Interestingly, in the same thread that hnha started, there is also a posting by brokenparser about NOT being able to access the linked content - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6228750 So, not only is your position a non-sequitur, it is also based on inconsistent evidence.