That's the fatal part of the argument It's not like I'm personally emailing his patient list telling them to drop him as a provider It's saying that having the information *available online* is unethical and harmful
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @mssilverstein and
It's saying that if they Google his name and find his blog and read his own words as he posted them for consumption by the public, this will harm his reputation That they're too dumb/ignorant/crazy/brainwashed by wokeness to make that decision, they must be protected from it
2 replies 4 retweets 63 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @mssilverstein and
It is astonishingly condescending and hypocritically self-serving It's a disqualifying position in and of itself
1 reply 2 retweets 55 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @mssilverstein and
If you prefer to write pseudononymously you should have that option. Is that seriously the point being debated here?
5 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GabrielObray @arthur_affect and
If I were gonna write pseudonymously, I would not choose My First Name + Middle Name as the pseudonym. That would just be asking to be caught out. *Especially* if I also published about similar topics under My First Name + Last Name, and all three names were easy to find out.
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @avram @arthur_affect and
Or if you start out with a rando blog that gains national attention that you never expected?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GabrielObray @arthur_affect and
I made this decision way back in the ’90s, when I first started out online. Do I want to put the effort into keeping a distinct online identity, or not? I decided not, because I knew real pseudonymity took a lot of effort. Even when I started my rando blog in 1998.
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @avram @GabrielObray and
Moreover, it puts a cap on how successful you can get By the time people are actually citing your blog in mainstream articles and you have actual famous people among your fans, you've probably got to make a choice either to hang it up or to come out
2 replies 1 retweet 15 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @avram and
I'm trying to think of exceptions and there aren't many Even pseudonymous writers back when information traveled at the speed of horseback were usually outed surprisingly quickly (George Eliot came out after writing her very first book)
4 replies 1 retweet 15 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @avram and
The biggest successful secret identity story I can think of is Belle du Jour/Brooke Magnanti, but that was back in the 2000s, before Web 2.0 really existed And she still outed herself in '09 because she was sure she was going to be outed involuntarily soon if she didn't
5 replies 1 retweet 6 likes
And, unlike what Scott was doing, that was actually a *secret* secret, not an "open secret" No one in her life knew she was Belle du Jour but her agent and her lawyer, her own family didn't know
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.