Ignore opsec for a moment. If he's discussing patient details, locations and dating material; that's a big ethics red flag we can't simply handwave away with pseudonymity.
Things like pen names are not rights we should defend like that, though. None of us will like it if some big media company casually decides that for anyone. Now if there is a good reason to de-anonymize him or anyone else because of wrongdoing: different argument.
-
-
I wrote about and defended de-anonymizing the reddit moderator who oversaw a "jailbait" and "creepshot" reddits which were terrible, harmful, indefensible. In this case, most of the arguments I've seen are.. he made it easy. That's not a reason. It should be on the merits.
-
I guess my thinking is you can't arbitrarily demand not to use your full name when you've used it in the past unless you have very good reasons
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It's very difficult for me to call this "de-anonymizing" given that I remember from my own experience when he published work under his real name, then moved it to a new location and said, "Yeah I'm using my middle name now." Esp given the state of the Google searche & books.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.