And I think people deserve a pen name until there is an argument on the merits. I've defended de-anonymization before (the reddit jailbait/creepshot moderator!). For SLC, he was careless is not an arguments on the merits. I know similar others; NYT respects their pen names.
-
-
I think it’d be a super interesting thing to explore and would love to read it. I appreciate being challenged on this.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's not just "sloppy opsec". He re-published a blog under his real name, with a link to his blog in the book. He intentionally linked his blog identity to his real identity in 2017, doxing himself. Is it really unfair for the NYT to then use this information?
-
The NY Times regularly reviews books written by people with perfectly transparent pen names. I don't see why it's relevant especially given the professional consequences.
- 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.