3 ms·
yeah but there's still a difference between having your name floating around for those who look for it, and plastering it on a billboard alongside vague implica
by beaconstudios 6y ago
yeah but there's still a difference between having your name floating around for those who look for it, and plastering it on a billboard alongside vague implications that he's a very bad man(TM).
- pseudalopex 6y agoHe said he was concerned about patients finding the pseudonym when they searched for his real name. Regardless of the content. The NYT article made specific claims. It's up to the reader to evaluate them and decide what to infer.
- beaconstudios 6y ago> He said he was concerned about patients finding the pseudonym when they searched for his real name. Regardless of the content. I figured the extension of "and the pseudonym relates to the content" is implied, as knowing "Scott Alexander Siskind" goes by "Scott Alexander" online is not very useful information. > The NYT article made specific claims. It's up to the reader to decide what to infer. "I've only ever seen pseudalopex on a forum that's known to be frequented by racists" is a specific claim that is true, but it's clearly making strong inferences about your character. Journalists play this game all the time in hit pieces.
- pseudalopex 6y agoHe was concerned about people finding Scott Alexander when they searched for Scott Siskind. Whether the NYT article would be positive or negative was irrelevant. You analogy doesn't reflect the article.