diff --git a/doc/forum/Authentication_for_URL_downloads/comment_2_2bb64609b66a24d1c071342cb75ac8cd._comment b/doc/forum/Authentication_for_URL_downloads/comment_2_2bb64609b66a24d1c071342cb75ac8cd._comment
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..5c37542861
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/forum/Authentication_for_URL_downloads/comment_2_2bb64609b66a24d1c071342cb75ac8cd._comment
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+[[!comment format=mdwn
+ username="tomdhunt"
+ avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/02694633d0fb05bb89f025cf779218a3"
+ subject="comment 2"
+ date="2025-04-10T20:25:30Z"
+ content="""
+Just passing the `--cookie` option to `curl` doesn't do it; what I need is to automatically fetch the current cookies from the browser and use those every time, i.e. to run custom code at download time. The old `web-download-command` option would have worked fine; alternatively, a setting to run a script to generate the curl options would also work.
+"""]]
diff --git a/doc/forum/path-specific_configuration_of_autocommit.mdwn b/doc/forum/path-specific_configuration_of_autocommit.mdwn
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..b1215fbf2d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/forum/path-specific_configuration_of_autocommit.mdwn
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+Is there any way to make the assistant (presumably also sync, etc) autocommit only in particular directories?
+
+I usually want to manage things myself, but autocommit would make it possible to use annex alongside some other automated tools if I moved their data directories under annex.
diff --git a/doc/todo/encrypt_just_the_annex_on_git+annex_hosting_site/comment_5_e3c67afcb36ba91a31de740b3dd02ba3._comment b/doc/todo/encrypt_just_the_annex_on_git+annex_hosting_site/comment_5_e3c67afcb36ba91a31de740b3dd02ba3._comment
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..7e7383dbea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/todo/encrypt_just_the_annex_on_git+annex_hosting_site/comment_5_e3c67afcb36ba91a31de740b3dd02ba3._comment
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+[[!comment format=mdwn
+ username="msz"
+ avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/6e8b88e7c70d86f4cfd27d450958aed4"
+ subject="comment 5"
+ date="2025-04-10T16:56:50Z"
+ content="""
+Thank you, this is very informative!
+
+Could such a special remote use the same \"transport\" as the underlying remote (thinking of p2p http in particular), which would mean the same authentication & the same set of permissions server side?
+"""]]