4 ms·

Is there not an enormous difference between spreading gossip (in my mind, always about someone in particular, which this is absolutely not, or at least not to a

• gorgoiler 4y ago
  The anecdote would have had as much impact, for me, without the hints as to the which parties were involved. If you are writing an anecdote about someone you know named Sandra Smith who worked on borg at Google then you should call them Charlie and say they worked on infra at a FAANG. Anonymising them by saying they worked on a certain Star Trek themed container tool at a didn’t-be-evil search engine wink wink isn’t meeting the bar for anonymity. Anyone doing that is kind of thumbing their nose at anonymity — I know I’m supposed to make this anonymous but here are some hints so we all know who I’m talking about. The people closest to the subject of the post — the ones where the impact of having their story shared with thousands of others is going to hurt the most — will see straight through it. You might as well call them Xandra Xmith who worked on xorg at Xoogle. Outing people in a way that means their closest associates know who it is, even if strangers don’t, feels tasteless. For me, that’s what makes this blog post feel like gossip. Again, I don’t know the details — everyone involved could be just fine with this story being public. (Thank you so much for asking your question in the spirit of HN. It adds value to something I perhaps should not have said in the first place.)