you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]sproketboy 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

[–]magnora7 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Thanks, I wish I could read the whole article without giving them my identity though...

I found one everyone can read: https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/10/media/tucker-carlson-writer-blake-neff/index.html

So basically they found out a hidden online username of the writer, dug through years of posts, and then the worst they could find they're firing him over it. Some of it is pretty bad, but this also seems like cancel culture destroying more targets they don't like. However some of the stuff the guy said is pretty cringey. Nothing violent though. How did they figure out this guy's pseudonym in the first place though? And no one seemed to care to dig in to this until the guy got popular enough to be worth taking down.

[–]whistlepig 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The weird thing is why he admitted to it so readily... It would be good to know why he didn't think plausible deniability was an option.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah good question, how did they even discover it was his in the first place? How did they link the account with this person? It must've been pretty clear where he felt there was no plausible deniability.

Which makes me wonder if they did IP tracing on those comments and tied it to his name, which would imply a gov't investigation, would it not? They'd have to get the IP from that website, as well as the IP of this person from the ISPs.

It's either that, or some of his comment were things that gave away his identity... like he posted something about him being a writer for tucker.

But the article doesn't seem to specify by which method he was figured out. I would really like to know the truth on this aspect of it.