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?
It's not really "doxing" when the public username they chose to use is their actual name, leading directly to their github profile, and their arguing that you always represent your employer, even if you "cloak" yourself in an alternate name.
Saying that it is a "breach of privacy" when the relevant details are being advertised by the person in question is silly.
I don't understand why (ostensibly) regular users of HN denigrate the site with throwaways.
The only thing separating this site from other trash on the internet is good-faith discussion, low trolling and the notion that people here aren't posting low-effort content with impunity, in my opinion.
It's clear in this thread that one or more people are messing with the other user who thought they went overboard linking a user's profiles on other sites - a point that could have been made without the links included.
