I mean, look, if he had already had anonymity, I would absolutely be considerably more understanding of the outrage behind this, but let’s be honest, his name has been connected to ssc (simple google search levels of easy) for a long time.
That fact has really made me question the motives behind why he chose this particular hill to die on.
Publication of his name in a NYT feature would have made a huge difference to the awareness level of his identity, vs just being able to be sniffed out by determined online sleuths, and would have dramatically altered his identifiability with respect to his clients.
I can see it both ways and don't care to argue the topic any further, but this position deserves to be put.
I agree though, it’s kind of a silly thing to put much concern into. I’m done worrying about it as well lol.
Of course it became a whole lot easier to identify him soon after he took down his blog, as it suddenly became a much bigger discussion topic online.
But being written about in the NYT still takes it to a whole new level. Without that, it's just something that nerds like us talk about on obscure discussion forums like this. When it's in a feature article in the NYT, it becomes something ordinary people talk about at dinners and cocktail parties.