I did it. I wrote 4,000 words about the Slate Star Codex article and put it on my heretofore dead Substack. I will almost certainly regret it for a million reasons, but I am a masochist, so here it is:https://mynewbandis.substack.com/p/slate-star-clusterfuck …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @espiers
I'm amazed you wrote 4000 words and didn't mention Scott Alexander's anonymity. The threat to dox him was a huge part of his beef with the NYT.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @erikcorry
Because he wasn't doxxed. His name was already public, just not on his post. And he's the one who made it public! And there's no credible evidence that the NYT threatened him with anything.
3 replies 0 retweets 67 likes -
Replying to @espiers
That's an argument. But not an argument for leaving it out of the article. I don't believe you can understand his feeling of victimization without this aspect. (Are you saying someone who Googled his professional name would be lead directly to SSC? That's the relevant direction.)
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @erikcorry
You'd need an argument TO leave it out, which no one has convincingly made, IMO. I wrote an unbylined blog in 2003 and when the Times covered it, they didn't hesitate to note that I was the person writing it and neither did any other outlet.
3 replies 0 retweets 44 likes -
Replying to @espiers @erikcorry
I also find the idea that Scott is being victimized ludicrous. His name is public and easily because HE put it out there. If he's so worried about privacy now, he can't blame the journalist. He made himself public.
3 replies 1 retweet 59 likes -
Replying to @espiers @erikcorry
Nice victim blaming: "You wore a revealing dress, can't complain about being raped." At no point did Scott make his real identity easy to find. He didn't make it extremely difficult, but that is not the same. 1/2
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Note that one reason why his identity was relatively easy to discover in one direction, was because people with a grudge tried to publicize it. There is an entire subreddit dedicated to sneering at the community. 2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
R/Sneerclub is a disappointingly dead subreddit unfortunately, and its existence isn't some kind of unique shocking event - subreddits are easy to make and any sufficiently high-visibility sub will have a hater sub opposing it
2 replies 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
And the fact that people use the name of the sub as a gotcha is funny, considering the sub header contains in full the breathtakingly self-regarding quote from Eliezer Yudkowsky that it comes from
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes
That the people who dislike him and find him worthy of repeated criticism constitute a "sneer club" characterized by "Dark Triad traits" etc
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
Anyway, I lurk on r/Sneerclub and it was assiduously scrupulous about enforcing the rule of always referring to Scott by his handle and not his wallet name, precisely to avoid this largely unnecessary drama (because contrary to the hype "rationalists" are huge drama queens)
3 replies 1 retweet 15 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @NotoriousAapje and
Same with Scott's supposedly endless persecution from
@rationalwiki, which also never used his legal name until he revealed it himself2 replies 1 retweet 14 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.