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.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
When you throw out words like "fan of eugenics" it kinda weakens your case "skaffen-amtiskaw", especially since you, yourself, are a pen name. I actually know a bit of history about what "fans of eugenics" have done and do not take kindly to the word being used lightly.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
You’ll notice that I constantly engage with people who are pseudonyms on this site. I try hard not to discount people because they don’t use their drivers license name. I’m pointing out defending peoples right express themselves should be obviously valuable to you.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
No I’m making a point by example. Obviously. (I routinely engage pseudonymous accounts, without prejudice.).
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.