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