The footer of the tool carried three links. Two were ordinary: contact and privacy. The third pointed here, under a headline about a lawsuit and public outrage. It is the piece of the site that explains what the rest of it was arguing about. Without it the tool reads as a product, not as a comment.
What the page actually referred to
It was not invented. In the early 2010s a tracking platform faced a widely reported legal claim after the death of a cyclist, and the question of whether timed segment leaderboards encouraged dangerous riding was argued in the cycling press and well beyond it for several years. The argument reached general news coverage, not only the specialist titles.
That case is the backdrop the whole site was built against. A tool that let anyone fabricate a segment time was a comment on what those leaderboards were worth, and the footer link made sure a visitor understood the argument. Satire without a target is only a prank, and the link supplied the target.
Why the detail is not reproduced here
The original page reproduced material naming private individuals in connection with litigation. None of that is republished at this address, and the names are not repeated, because nothing about the argument requires them and the people involved are not public figures. The point survives perfectly well without a single name attached to it.
What remains is a description. This address resolves because links and searches still arrive at it, and an address that once answered should not begin returning an error through neglect alone. Links from that period still arrive here, and they find a page and not a failure, which is the whole reason it exists.
The tool itself is described in the archive, alongside the earlier build.