Names make things easier to discuss, acknowledge, and try to maintain personal awareness of.
But there is no need to use the name of a guy to describe the problem. It's like naming hacking the principle of Zuck
Zuckerberg-ing (sometimes) refers (jokingly) to the practice of co-founding a business with someone and then screwing the other founder out of their share of the business. I’m not familiar with any other name for that but it’s a useful one as far as colloquial definitions go.
So because you don't like this naming scheme no name should be allowed at all?
So we can't talk about it and analyze it?
Talking about and analyzing the problem might lead to mitigating or even substantially fixing it, which would remove its usefulness as a rhetorical attack on attempts to solve social problems.
of course we can. But why name it Shirky?
The felonynolef principle is now "No matter who you name something after, someone will complain about it."
Because Clay Shirky stated it at some point, and someone quoted him on it, and it stuck. Hope this helps.