I think you could make a convincing argument that _why would fit the legal definition of a Limited-Purpose Public Figure. http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/proving-fault-actual-...
> Individuals who are considered to be limited-purpose public figures remain so as long as the public has an "independent" interest in the underlying controversy.
I would argue that _why's retreat to privacy is no longer a "controversy" of interest to the general public, assuming it ever was.