I didn't say he ought to; I said that if he were to self-disclose, there'd be little damage that could occur to his effectiveness as a clinician, contrary to wh

I didn't say he ought to; I said that if he were to self-disclose, there'd be little damage that could occur to his effectiveness as a clinician, contrary to what he claimed. Further, to cite that as his first reason for wanting to remain pseudonymous is odd, because it's flimsy for the reasons I cited. His second reason (that he's gotten death threats) is much more compelling, and to me is all he needs to make a good argument here. Why sully it with things like this?