>I assume the least viewed articles in this blog post will have lost their status by now
You didn't directly say it, but as the status given them in the blog post was "least read article of 2021" the statement is wrong. It's more because you worded it ambiguously, but that's why you got a pedantic reply.
The statement still remains valid, since the current year is no longer 2021 and it doesn't claim that the list is absolute or eternal. Neither does the article.
The blog post is specifically about the least read article in 2021, and in that context saying it can lose that status is wrong. The "least read article of 2021" is now eternal.
I don't get why you're so reluctant to admit you could have worded something better. "I assume the least read articles of 2021 mentioned in the blog post are no longer the least read articles this year" would have said the same thing without the ambiguity. It's not that big of a deal.
But it actually was the least read article at that time. Since that time is past and the post was made together with links to the least viewed articles, it's a given that they no longer are today.
