Scott accidentally fomenting revolt within the NYT just by being the most perfect innocent cinnamon roll nobody can stand to see harmed is my everythinghttps://twitter.com/karolkarpinski/status/1276220747468414977 …
-
Why should your coworkers' and clients' right to find everything you've ever written be a function of how many people think you're worth listening to?
We weren't talking about "the public interest," we were talking about what one's clients should know about the external lives of the people they work with. Why would that also be contingent on having a large following? There's no consistency here, just "yes for me, no for thee."
-
-
We don't need to know SSC's exact conflicts of interests to judge the quality of his work, or to judge the veracity of his assertions. We can just read his articles and judge them by the merits of their evidence and arguments.
-
I don't even see why having opinions that aren't shared with clients would be a "conflict of interest." It's true of literally every psychiatrist who has ever lived who wasn't just a block of wood with a smile painted on.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Legal standards pertaining to defamation are totally orthogonal to the conversation here, and if it weren't incredibly self-serving I doubt you'd even bring it up. Consider for one second the implications of selectively ruining only people whose ideas are well-read.
End of conversation
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.