Comment by Jordan-117
4 days ago
Did you not read the article? They not only directed a DDOS against a blogger who crossed them, but altered their own archived snapshots to amplify a smear against them. That completely destroys their trustworthiness and credibility as a source of truth.
Sure I read it. But I don't believe everything I read on the internet.
The proof is right there for you to see. Denying it is rather wacky.
Altered snapshots = hide Nora name?
ArsTechica just did the same - removed Nora from older articles. How can you trust ArsTechica after that?
They didn't just remove her name, but replaced it with the target's name.
I don't know what you're talking about re: Ars removing her name from old articles.
Follow-up: maybe you're confusing Ars Technica with Wikipedia, whose admins did redact Nora's last name from discussions? If so, that's a weird equivalence to draw, since the change was disclosed and done to protect personal information, not attack someone else in the process. (Also, "Nora [redacted]" itself seems to be a name lifted from an unrelated person who had merely contacted Archive.today with a takedown request.)
8 replies →
[dead]