Huh. No, actually, he very clearly says that anonymous comments can be deleted and reposted as long as the editing is done before someone has replied to them. He continues, to the same anon: "Not only are you likely to do it, you actually have done it."
If you want to think the use of the pronoun "it" makes things unclear and that, technically, Nick is completely right because he changed the meaning of "it" after the fact, thus saving his ass, that's your prerogative.
A final note: mme_hardy makes good points, and I'd just like to note that, in conjunction with her comments, all this screencapping and saving of links of things women have said was being done by the same guy who linked Sriduangkaew with her troll personae. And he admitted in his own words that he'd always told her to come out, and when she didn't, he took it upon himself to decide the situation was "getting dangerous" so he "stepped in" with his ello post. Then he went to great and sloppy lengths, as mme_hardy pointed out, to justify his actions as not outing.
I'm not saying Nick is "completely right". He does say that posts can be deleted and reposted, that's the unlikely chain of events I mentioned. The exchange after that is:
Anon: Though nice touch, trying to dismiss my credibility by implying that I'm likely to want to hide evidence, or change my words.
Nick: Not only are you likely to do it, you actually have done it, with your "stupid" schtick.
I don't think that's unclear, "it" refers to the back-and-forth about who said what was stupid, above that. He is implying that anon is capable of editing a reply if they could, which is a dick move, and he doesn't acknowledge that this would require James' extremely unlikely collusion, which is a dicker move, but he did not, technically, say that they did. Again, that's how he gets away with it, and that's why I think it's worth pointing out.
Nah, man, Nick gets away with it because of his years and years of personal branding, his choice of targets, plus a host of reasons within the fandom that always come up during every kerfuffle, fail and scandal.
no subject
Date: 2014-10-19 05:09 am (UTC)If you want to think the use of the pronoun "it" makes things unclear and that, technically, Nick is completely right because he changed the meaning of "it" after the fact, thus saving his ass, that's your prerogative.
A final note: mme_hardy makes good points, and I'd just like to note that, in conjunction with her comments, all this screencapping and saving of links of things women have said was being done by the same guy who linked Sriduangkaew with her troll personae. And he admitted in his own words that he'd always told her to come out, and when she didn't, he took it upon himself to decide the situation was "getting dangerous" so he "stepped in" with his ello post. Then he went to great and sloppy lengths, as mme_hardy pointed out, to justify his actions as not outing.
Just a couple things to think about.
no subject
Date: 2014-10-19 05:34 am (UTC)I don't think that's unclear, "it" refers to the back-and-forth about who said what was stupid, above that. He is implying that anon is capable of editing a reply if they could, which is a dick move, and he doesn't acknowledge that this would require James' extremely unlikely collusion, which is a dicker move, but he did not, technically, say that they did. Again, that's how he gets away with it, and that's why I think it's worth pointing out.
no subject
Date: 2014-10-19 06:26 am (UTC)Nah, man, Nick gets away with it because of his years and years of personal branding, his choice of targets, plus a host of reasons within the fandom that always come up during every kerfuffle, fail and scandal.