> attacked me rather hysterically on Twitter

The article is not the most relevant link when claiming you were attacked "hysterically" on Twitter. If a link to the latter does not exist, preventing neutral parties from evaluating the situation, I do not see the point in leaving this comment.

I am confused.

This is your tweet about the article [0] - it's from 18 hours ago. The last tweet from Alexandra [1] is from the 9th of May.

Am I missing something?

[0] https://mobile.twitter.com/lpfeed/status/1411543135944073217 [1] https://mobile.twitter.com/ringo_ring/status/139160709025538...

No. Our last tweets are not the ones I was referring to.

IT seems obtuse not to link directly and expect people to figure out what you are referring to. I suggest you resubmit your comment with additional context.

> Ms. Elbakyan attacked me rather hysterically on Twitter when she learned of an article on my site that describes several methods to acquire free copies of scientific articles,

Just looks like an emphatic disagreement to me: https://web.archive.org/web/20200928010251/https://twitter.c..., https://web.archive.org/web/20200928011503/https://twitter.c...

Also, considering the etymology ("of the womb"), your criticism of her replies comes across as quite sexist.

Thanks for digging that up, I appreciate it; I didn’t think of looking in the Archive.

We’ll have to disagree about whether her reaction was hysterical. She called my article “ridiculous” and compared it to recommending that people use horse-and-buggy transportation. I was pretty mystified by the tenor of her remarks. One of my points was that Sci-Hub could become unavailable, either globally or locally, so it’s good to know about other ways to get one’s hands on articles. Just mentioning alternatives was offensive to her. We see now that this was not an unrealistic consideration.

EDIT: It’s not ideal to add to your comments using the edit button without marking them as edits. Let me reply to your last sentence by saying I do not think it is sexist to use the word “hysterical”, which has a well-understood meaning apart from its etymology, to someone who happens to be female. In fact, I think it would be very silly to police one’s speech in this way.

> Let me reply to your last sentence by saying I do not think it is sexist to use the word “hysterical”, which has a well-understood meaning apart from its etymology, to someone who happens to be female.

Then do you think maybe you misread Elbakyan's tone from her word choices, in a similar way to how I misread yours? She even stated in her last reply that she wasn't being hostile.

Of course that’s possible. Everyone can make their own judgments. I stand by my characterization.

But no, I was interpreting her remarks based on the meanings of the words she used, not their etymologies. That’s usually more productive.

Where is that "uncontrolled extreme emotion" in her words, that you refer to? All I see is some guy who is still hurt almost a year after someone disagreed with him on Twitter. I can't imagine Alexandra has any sleepless nights over this, you may want to reflect on who is the "hysterical" party in your story.

Calling women who politely contradict you “hysterical” is sexist, full stop. When you inadvertently use offensive prejudiced language out of ignorance, and people point that out, the appropriate action is to apologize and try not to do it again, not start making excuses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteria

Honestly, this seems to be a cultural thing. Having been exposed to both Russians and Americans, I would never dare use those words in a disagreement with American colleague, for example. But talking to a Russian one, I would use much harder ones for my point to be taken seriously, and would not have expected any bad blood over it.

Well, then I hope I’m wrong about the vehemence behind her remarks. But I’m still puzzled about the reason for her objections in the first place. What’s so wrong about mentioning that there are some ways to get reprints besides Sci-Hub?

The fact that _you_ are "still puzzled" should give you a hint about who is subject to "uncontrolled extreme emotion" in your exchange with Alexandra.

> Ms. Elbakyan attacked me rather hysterically on Twitter

Interestingly you have shared a link to your article, but not to the Twitter thread you referenced. Which raises suspicions about you telling the truth and the full truth.

> but I have concerns about its stability

Just set up a mirror then.

The account from which she attacked me is suspended, and the tweets do not show. If I linked to the thread, which I can if you insist, it will only have my side of the conversation. Those who know me also know that I am telling the truth. If you prefer to disregard what I say, that’s fine with me.

If you don't link to the thread, everyone will prefer to disregard what you say.

See up above, where someone found it in the Archive.