diff --git a/doc/forum/hashing_objects_directories/comment_2_d095c769febedca2d69fa5d099bcb520._comment b/doc/forum/hashing_objects_directories/comment_2_d095c769febedca2d69fa5d099bcb520._comment
deleted file mode 100644
index 41c6ad5d96..0000000000
--- a/doc/forum/hashing_objects_directories/comment_2_d095c769febedca2d69fa5d099bcb520._comment
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,12 +0,0 @@
-[[!comment format=mdwn
- username="http://joey.kitenet.net/"
- nickname="joey"
- subject="comment 2"
- date="2011-03-14T16:12:51Z"
- content="""
-My experience is that modern filesystems are not going to have many issues with tens to hundreds of thousands of items in the directory. However, if a transition does happen for FAT support I will consider adding hashing. Although getting a good balanced hash in general without, say, checksumming the filename and taking part of the checksum, is difficult. 
-
-I prefer to keep all the metadata in the filename, as this eases recovery if the files end up in lost+found. So while \"SHA/\" is a nice workaround for the FAT colon problem, I'll be doing something else. (What I'm not sure yet.)
-
-There is no point in creating unused hash directories on initialization. If anything, with a bad filesystem that just guarantees worst performance from the beginning..
-"""]]