by-blow

I know these "blow-by-blow" comments can seem petty, but there are just so many things wrong with this post.

The blow-by-blow he-said/she-said format doesn't appeal to me at all.

I can't believe I am regularly reading popehat for the blow-by-blow on this.

It would be a huge service to the community for someone to release a blow-by-blow timeline from inside the company about all these responses and the thinking behind them.

Sounds more like a "pattern of law breaking" argument was used to upgrade it rather than the facts of this particular matter, but again this is just speculation because we're not reading a blow-by-blow account of the trial.

The only semi-accurate sources are from people who witnessed an event as it happened and wrote a blow-by-blow account of it as it was happening with little to no interpretation or explanation - a liveblogging/tweetstream of it, if you will.

You've delivered a tour de force through the causes of this widely misunderstood and under-diagnosed syndrome; you've given a whole new generation of overstimulated hackers a whole new disease to research on the internet; and you've left humanity with an earth-shattering, blow-by-blow account of what it really feels like to experience spoiled-manchild melancholy, all the way from a loft in Williamsburg back to your parents' basement, by way of Buenos Aires.