I think the parent responder's point was that you're using a throwaway account because you're making a claim of which you're so uncertain, that you're not willing to risk staking your own reputation on its accuracy. Ironically the claim you're making affects the reputation of the person you're identifying at least 100 times more than your own, whether it turns out to be right or wrong!
In short, whether or not you're right, you're a) being reckless and potentially libelous given that you don't actually know any details about the issue in question other than what was stated in the blog post, b) completely aware of what such statements can do to someone's reputation, and c) simultaneously more concerned about how your actions affect yourself than how they may affect others.
Now, I'm not saying that I disagree with your sentiment. If someone is a bad actor, then I'd prefer to figure out how to help others avoid getting taken by them. But how many witch hunts do we have to see happen only to find out there's another side to the story, before we stop encouraging witch hunts?
In short, whether or not you're right, you're a) being reckless and potentially libelous given that you don't actually know any details about the issue in question other than what was stated in the blog post, b) completely aware of what such statements can do to someone's reputation, and c) simultaneously more concerned about how your actions affect yourself than how they may affect others.
Now, I'm not saying that I disagree with your sentiment. If someone is a bad actor, then I'd prefer to figure out how to help others avoid getting taken by them. But how many witch hunts do we have to see happen only to find out there's another side to the story, before we stop encouraging witch hunts?