Looking is. Sharing, I'm not so sure? At least for me, it crosses a boundary.
Especially since it's looking and sharing for something as irrelevant as "HN name doesn't check out!"
Looking is. Sharing, I'm not so sure? At least for me, it crosses a boundary.
Especially since it's looking and sharing for something as irrelevant as "HN name doesn't check out!"
I think it’s reasonable: just look at how many scams there have been over the last few years since cryptocurrency made it so easy to convert running code into money. The open source world is not what it was a couple decades ago and it’s reasonable to have the discussion about how to trust someone in a way which might have seemed obsessive twenty years ago, similar to how we used to think realistic faked images were hard to make and thus uncommon but now have to think about provenance for everything.
The point is that there was exactly nothing of suspicion.
This was to correct the doubt that the HN poster was not the same person as the GitHub user.
Conceding to you that a search can be useful, GP could've stopped at "The github is old and the person has other reputable projects". There was no reason to expand to the LinkedIn.
If there is something of suspicion or not lies in the eye of the beholder.
Only LinkedIn showed the link between the HN profile and the Github profile, because it lists both the project mentioned on the HN profile as well as the project listed in the Github profile.
> If there is something of suspicion or not lies in the eye of the beholder.
That may tell more about the beholder than you think.
> Only LinkedIn showed the link between the HN profile and the Github profile, because it lists both the project mentioned on the HN profile as well as the project listed in the Github profile.
What if there was no link between the HN profile and GitHub, then? Would you conclude that, because you can't reliably link the HN profile to the GitHub profile (that was independently already trustworthy), this would make the project seem suspicious?
In other words -- Would your projects be more suspicious, if I, a total stranger, made Show HNs about them?
You're seeing my point, don't you?
If it were a legitimately suspicious issue, I’d think sharing was the right thing to do.
I disagree with the idea that having multiple nicknames is suspicious, though. But, if that is something the poster believes, I guess I can see why they’d share it.
I am absolutely, perfectly, 100% fine with how OP structures, manages, names, and presents his online profiles.
After the latest fun incidents with NPM and others, I just wanted to make a point how the way the project is currently "marketed" and distributed — and again, PERFECTLY fine for a first draft and "look what I built" — might stand in the way of it getting further traction.
And I did so in a very stream-of-consciousness way, trying to illustrate what I mean by "Trust & Safety issue".
I still don’t see the issue. There’s a HackerNews account and a GitHub account. The HackerNews account could be some random person.
All of the other aspects of identity are on the other side, the GitHub account with the real name, other projects, a reputation. So then, consider the Hackernews account to be some random, start the check-out at the GitHub, and you don’t see anything particularly suspicious.