Does this really obscure "Michelle's" identity? CFO at a major, well run enterprise company, worked at Opsware until ~2005, and later she served 3.5 months in prison. (Not sure if gender was randomized.)
That seems to be enough to figure out who it was.
Edit: Per romed's comment, Sharlene Abrams seems to fit those criteria:
It is not meant to permanently obscure it; only to avoid specifically naming them for Google Searches as a courtesy. It's not like "Michelle" didn't do what Ben said she did; she in fact did a lot worse.
Fair enough, but it seems he added a lot of unnecessary detail that made her easy to identify with high confidence. The exact length of the prison sentence? The year of resignation? The title at current and previous job?
That seems like a lot of work that went at cross purposes to anonymization.
Does this really obscure "Michelle's" identity? CFO at a major, well run enterprise company, worked at Opsware until ~2005, and later she served 3.5 months in prison. (Not sure if gender was randomized.)
That seems to be enough to figure out who it was.
Edit: Per romed's comment, Sharlene Abrams seems to fit those criteria:
Confirming the ~4 month sentence: https://www.law360.com/articles/229277/ex-mercury-cfo-gets-4...
https://www.reuters.com/article/mercury-plea/former-mercury-...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18027437
And I also found this, which recounts the same details of the story and confirms Abrams: https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/02/06/how-ben-horowitz-avo...