3 ms·
because in the last decade or so, if not more, the common method of attack has been to shame. not debate on merits, in public shame. don't believe for a minute
by Shivetya 6y ago
because in the last decade or so, if not more, the common method of attack has been to shame. not debate on merits, in public shame. don't believe for a minute they won't resort to combining the information to find people. they will also pretty much write off any ip addresses linked to questionable IPs that supported the cause the paper needs supported.
sadly in this inter connected world it is far easier to name and shame people which thwarts any useful discussion, it is no different than voter intimidation; which is why one side wants to do away with secret ballots in unionization pushes.
winning is all that is cared about.
what are we going to do when either the NYT or another organization links back those ids to private individuals, just hashtag apologize and ignore it?
- elliekelly 6y agoThere are no “private” individuals who commented. These are public comments. As in, they are on the public record. A full name and address was required in order to submit a comment. There is no privacy or anonymity when you’re commenting on the public record. The NYT of any other organization can pull the filing and see each and every name and address associated with a comment. No combing or linking back to IDs needed. It’s all there for the entire world the see as part of the public record. The information that will be exposed by this ruling is the IP address(es) of whoever fraudulently commented using other people’s names and addresses.