I sent an email to the reporter I had talked to a few times about my difficulties with PNNL with a link to my post saying I was dropping my lawsuit against the lab. He wrote a story which was published today.
Even with that post as a written reference the paper still managed to get a few things wrong.
- The paper says, “Rather than argue about excessive personal use of lab computers, he chose to back down.” Apparently the reporter doesn’t understand that if the lab did an investigation that concluded I had 13 gazillion terabytes of child porn on my work computer (they did not, but they did claim this picture was “adult content”) and my computer was actually squeaky clean I would not have a case unless the motive for the false report was for something like me being of the wrong race, religion, etc. They could be as incompetent as a retarded monkey taking a calculus exam (pretty good analogy to what actually happened) and I would not have had a case. No law or court demands they be competent in their investigation.
- The paper says, “A former cyber security analyst…”. My actual title was “Senior Research Scientist II”.
Oh well. What do you expect?