You may find this argument fails to compel you, but that's the argument.
-
-
A "he deserves de-anonymizing" because his of his views argument is different. Does not seem to be what NYT was doing or defending. And, yes, of course, therapists deserve extra consideration for privacy and pen names! (As do many others! Pen names are a basic right).
4 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @can @KirinDave and
Again, if people want to argue that what he's done is so terrible that he deserves de-anonymization, that's totally different. That's not the NYT claim or position. Other than that, yeah, one's right to a pen name should not depend on quality of prior opsec.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @can @KirinDave and
If trappings of "public figure" of even that small or any scale are to have no right to have a blog without having to seriously curtail your professional life, which for a therapist is certainly fair, many people will suffer under that criteria. This is not a reasonable standard.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
To inject some context: Scott Alexander appears to relish his role as a notable public intellectual, and in meetups — his blog has meetups! — apparently introduces himself with his real name.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Once again, NYT is a different game; it changes the Google aspect. I had a version of this problem before, and one NYT article was the change (in my case, I needed it--long story I should maybe write). Obscurity is in layers; one NYT article is forever your first search result.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
People have argued that I'm a public figure therefore xyz about me so many times before. Everyone who blogs or gets a few thousand followers on Twitter etc. faces that argument. It' not a good argument. And NYT respects pen names of much more public and important public figures.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
And I know many examples like that, people with great public influence, who either need or choose to use a pen name, and the NYT respects it. And I know people for whom it is imperative; because the pen name is the friction between them and the random loon or their job.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of 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.