7 ms·
As soon as the author began referencing Applebaum seriously, the article lost most of its credibility.
by PieterH 10y ago
As soon as the author began referencing Applebaum seriously, the article lost most of its credibility.
- ryanlol 10y agoI'm curious, why? Is it because of the recent sexual misconduct allegations or something else?
- jlappi 10y agoCan't speak for OP, but that's probably it. After the whole cluster that blew up around him the community seems very split in their opinion of him now.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- mst 10y agoI dunno, Applebaum might've been an epic plagiarist, but the work he was trying to take credit for was often solid.
- PieterH 10y agoI'm sure the work was solid, yet not his. To weave him into this story with that stupid tagline "the most dangerous man on the Internet" with the insinuation he was some kind of hacker... is garbage journalism.
- psykpsyk 10y agoThe article explicitly says the "most dangerous man in the world" line is from a Rolling Stone article. If anyone did "garbage journalism", as you insinuate, was Rolling Stone, not Reuters or Bamford. Why are you trying to fool the other fools in here who haven't attentively read the article? Do you work for the US government, or do you have any other agenda? Maybe you have some grudge about Appelbaum itself?
- kalsk 10y ago> Applebaum might've been an epic plagiarist What are the plagiarism charges against him? I'm only aware of the sexual harassment/assault/rape allegations.
- mst 10y agoI haven't been specifically saving URLs on this, but it's a pattern of behaviour that's been discussed at length on the internet more than once. Given that, I'd effectively be googling and then picking the articles that best suited my current beliefs on the topic, so honestly you'd be better informed by googling and then reading until you have your own beliefs. (this is not meant to be a disguised lmgtfy, I genuinely think you'd come out worse informed if I tried)