I agree and don't like anon accounts. That being said, I will un-anonymously say I agree with that particular comment. "indefensible" and "Unprincipled" are very accurate adjectives for describing most of the media's coverage of COVID.

Are you referring to fox news? I'd like to see examples from somewhere more reputable, and not your one-off-editor-shoulda-caught-that issue.

I use only a throwaway account. I'd rather stay anonymous, especially when I cannot delete my posts.

If what you have to say isn't worth your reputation, then maybe you should think twice before spreading that same thought to real [and often vulnerable] people on the still-nascent internet.

Genuinely: Do you have any knowledge of the culture from the beginning of the world wide web?

Anonymity, and even pseudo anonymity, ensures free discourse.

Good ideas, no matter how unpopular, scary, or threatening to a power structure that could crush the commenter, rise to the top of most conversation formats with reliable regularity.

> Do you have any knowledge of the culture from the beginning of the world wide web?

Yeah, it consisted of people with mental faculties that far exceed the minimum requirements of today's internet.

>If what you have to say isn't worth your reputation

Because I believe the current trajectory of society will place more than just my reputation at risk for expressing my thoughts. Make of that what you will.

Also, unearned hit to one's reputation. Reputation is not infallible.

Though sadly, the truth seems to benefit most when it is backed by the real or proverbial blood of martyrs.

>Don't worry, people already know who you are, and you'll get what you deserve no matter how much you try to hide it.

That's going to be yikes from me, dog.

Thank you for driving home my point, though. I don't think you're aware of how dangerous your mentality is and where it leads. I'd suggest to you that I am not your enemy and we likely have a lot of common ground. I don't think the US handled COVID well and I don't like to see others suffer so needlessly. I also think that there are many things we can do to prevent further diseases such as reduce our dependency on factory farming and to invest more in improving the general health of our country. I don't suspect you'd disagree with those thoughts.

If you're going to incite/approve of malice/violence against somebody, at least have the balls to say it clearly.

That's not what I'm saying at all.

I'm saying that the people who, most likely, matter the the most to you, have already made their judgment of you, and that's based on what can't be hidden by an anonymous username.

He doesn’t want to get cancelled?

As stated in a sibling comment:

> If what you have to say isn't worth your reputation, then maybe you should think twice before spreading that same thought to real [and often vulnerable] people on the still-nascent internet.

And if you can't clearly explain your exception (ex. escaping local persecution), then the point stands.

That’s implying you’re conversing with rational person, but fear of cancel-culture is being canceled even for rational thinking, thus people false preferences and/or are dishonest.