2 ms·
> I did not [demand] that anyone do anything. But you repeatedly criticized him for voicing his objections to being de-anonymized. When asked how he could’ve d
by waon 6y ago
> I did not [demand] that anyone do anything.
But you repeatedly criticized him for voicing his objections to being de-anonymized. When asked how he could’ve done so differently, you said that he should’ve wrote about how terrible his blog posts were instead. How is this different from demanding that he shut up?
> It's silly to jump from what I actually said to what you inferred.
That’s an explanation of what you’ve been doing all along with the whole “making suggestions” nonsense.
- memexy 6y agoIs criticism no longer allowed? Isn't that the foundation of rational debate? I have no opinions on his anonymity. I personally don't care or want to know who he is and wasn't planning on reading the NYT article. I have my own conclusions about SSC and its community that I doubt would be changed by the article and no one here has yet convinced me otherwise or given any compelling evidence to the contrary. I have explained why I used the words that I did. If you have any more points to make then quote me in context and provide an actual rebuttal instead of calling what I wrote "nonsense".