An employee doesn’t act as an official representative of their employer nor do they speak for the employee in any official capacity. That is what the message says.
The informal also didn’t cloak their identity (implies some malicious intent), they simple did not use their work email. Nothing wrong with that.
@dang, can we establish a rule that NSA apologists should not be doxxing HN members for the sin of advocating against the NSA's preferred narratives and worldview?
Deliberate personal breaches of privacy against HN members as a response to the contents of their speech like this stifle free discourse to the highest degree possible and should be banned or at least harshly admonished, no?
[flagged]
An employee doesn’t act as an official representative of their employer nor do they speak for the employee in any official capacity. That is what the message says.
The informal also didn’t cloak their identity (implies some malicious intent), they simple did not use their work email. Nothing wrong with that.
I’m sorry, can you state which organization you are speaking for with this comment? It wasn’t immediately clear.
[flagged]
@dang, can we establish a rule that NSA apologists should not be doxxing HN members for the sin of advocating against the NSA's preferred narratives and worldview?
Deliberate personal breaches of privacy against HN members as a response to the contents of their speech like this stifle free discourse to the highest degree possible and should be banned or at least harshly admonished, no?
9 replies →