It seems more likely that an actual whistle-blower would choose a more widely read media outlet (Wikileaks even?)
The more widely read the media outlet, the higher the probability of the whistle-blower's anonymity getting blown.
The more widely read the media outlet, the higher the probability of the whistle-blower's anonymity getting blown.
Once it's released anywhere the risk of losing anonymity is basically the same in the end. Either it's a troll and will die here or it's true and will be disseminated everywhere. Such a strategy would only make sense if the original poster thought that this forum would replicate the research and publish it with no mention of the original source, but that seems more like the kind of thing an investigative journalist would do.
Post will be returning in Main, after a rewrite by the company's writing staff. Citations Galore.