I didn't really pay attention to your username and am seeing now that not only are you the submitter (to HN), but also the author of the submitted post.
As I mentioned, I haven't read your piece so I won't (as I can't knowledgeably do so) comment on the validity of your complaint about GP's point.
I don't have any issue with you, your blog or anything surrounding those things.
In fact, I'm sure you make a bunch of valid, interesting and insightful points in your post.
That said, while you're responding to me as if I had read, digested and considered all the points you make in that post, that's not the case.
My comment was completely unrelated (except as it elicited a response from GP) to your blog post and addressed a completely different set of issues.
N.B., I actually did read your blog post, but didn't realize it was the submission for this discussion thread. I agree with much of what you wrote, especially as it relates to the greedy scum who run Meta and its ilk, as well as the very real risks to a wide swathe of folks who are disfavored by some (many?) in our societies. Especially when those greedy scum "out" folks to add to their sewer of filthy lucre, which is then seized upon by the intolerant jerks to harass innocent people.
All that said, I stand by my initial point: Don't want something read by the "public"? Don't post it in a public forum. Full stop.
All the rest is orthogonal to the argument I made in the comments to which you replied.
I didn't really pay attention to your username and am seeing now that not only are you the submitter (to HN), but also the author of the submitted post.
As I mentioned, I haven't read your piece so I won't (as I can't knowledgeably do so) comment on the validity of your complaint about GP's point.
I don't have any issue with you, your blog or anything surrounding those things.
In fact, I'm sure you make a bunch of valid, interesting and insightful points in your post.
That said, while you're responding to me as if I had read, digested and considered all the points you make in that post, that's not the case.
My comment was completely unrelated (except as it elicited a response from GP) to your blog post and addressed a completely different set of issues.
N.B., I actually did read your blog post, but didn't realize it was the submission for this discussion thread. I agree with much of what you wrote, especially as it relates to the greedy scum who run Meta and its ilk, as well as the very real risks to a wide swathe of folks who are disfavored by some (many?) in our societies. Especially when those greedy scum "out" folks to add to their sewer of filthy lucre, which is then seized upon by the intolerant jerks to harass innocent people.
All that said, I stand by my initial point: Don't want something read by the "public"? Don't post it in a public forum. Full stop.
All the rest is orthogonal to the argument I made in the comments to which you replied.