Partner Offers $10K Bounty for Blogger’s Identity

Aside from the "effect" v. "affect" discussion in the comments, this made for some interesting reading.

I agree that the blogger has a right to anonymously express his/her views, which aren't alleged to be slanderous. True, they might have more force if the blogger attached his/her name to them, but if someone wants to maintain a blog under a pseudonym, I support that (obviously!). The attorney in this article says he wants to out him/her because "the blogger should take responsibility for his or her views. Plus, he points out, knowing the identity and affiliations of the blogger likely would affect the way that readers perceive the Troll Tracker's critique."

Yeah, right. I very much doubt that the latter argument is the attorney's true motivation.

If the argument blogger's criticism has merit, it has merit regardless of the speaker. Same if it has no merit. It will win or lose based on its validity.

It's exactly when an arugment has good merit that opponents want to attack the messenger. Classic diversion tactic. Can't refute the argument -- so instead tar the messenger on some collateral issue to undermine his/her credibility with the hope of a spill-over effect on the issue at hand.

I suspect nefarious motives at work here.