I personally don't think his reply was over the top. The academics didn't just use his name, they used his PHOTOGRAPH as well for their spambot. That makes it a

I personally don't think his reply was over the top. The academics didn't just use his name, they used his PHOTOGRAPH as well for their spambot. That makes it a personal attack on his good name and not just some generic thing. Reasonable people are going to think that the spam bot was him. The vibe I got was that he started with that anecdote because he wanted to disclose straight out the time he publicly shamed some people and what the exact circumstances were. If he had not done so, people would have referred to that incident in the comments and he'd be on the defensive at that point. So he dealt with it instead as the lead, laying it all out. Another author writing a similar story who had not been in such a situation would not have to have that lead.