Search the Lounge


« Contract As Disclosure II (Or Why I Keep Signing That Same Stupid Liability Waiver) | Main | Reflections of a Re-Identification Target, Part I: Some Information Doesn’t Want To Be Free »

May 23, 2013


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Didn't BLRT and MacK say that there were three blogs that could have had their email addresses?


Want to agree with 3:52 pm. For love of God, close this thread and save MacK, Campos, and the others from embarrassing themselves further.

Albert Ross

Leiter and Filler are the ones being embarrassed, or at least they should be. Plus Alfred Brophy, who evidently doesn't have a clue as to how his own blog works.

Paul Horwitz

In rereading this thread more carefully, I see that I owe one major apology to MacK, and one important modification of what I said earlier. On the first point, I must confess I read the thread so quickly that I did not even see (what I assume is) his full name used; I assumed when I wrote that if there had been such a post, it had been deleted. That's a big error on my part, for which I apologize. It may come as some slight comfort to him that it was so easy for at least one reader not to see it (and that even now I have forgotten his name), but if it were my name being used I sure as hell wouldn't miss it, and others didn't, so I doubt it's much comfort.

I'm ambivalent on what the exact ethics of naming anonymous commenters are, and that ambivalence might be added to slightly in instances where someone uses a screen-name that is so close to his or her actual name. But I don't want to make too much of that ambivalence. As I've said on my blog, I think the appropriate response, as a general rule, to comments or commenters one thinks don't belong on one's blog is to block comments or commenters, not to reveal the identity of the commenter. (More than that, I think blog administrators *ought* to block some comments and commenters, to keep their comments threads from becoming cesspools.) I wouldn't reveal the name of a commenter in ordinary circumstances, and if I ever thought extraordinary circumstances applied I would do it under my own name so I could take personal responsibility for doing so. So I disapprove of the anonymous commenter's action here. I do continue to think most of this comment thread was not germane to the main post and should have been cut. But that definitely goes for the "outing" comment as well, and I would have deleted it swiftly if it were my own blog.

The modifications above are important ones, and my apology to MacK is sincere. Beyond that, I don't think there's anything else in my comment I would change.

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad