Instead of getting into specifics, would simply listing them as "someone I would never work with again" suffice? If enough people do this then the specifics don't really matter... the warning sign is clear.

This seems to avoid the defamation issue because it is a personal statement (about yourself / your thoughts) instead of a statement about them. They could still sue you for defamation, but hopefully you could get it thrown out early at a low cost?

I'm not a lawyer, but I would assume that even that could be grounds for someone to file a lawsuit. I would like to believe that a judge wouldn't let that get very far, but if the person tried to claim material losses due to (e.g.) not being able to find work "due to your comments" then you might have to sit out a trial or settle.

Is it still libel or defamation if it's all true?

No, but that's not the point.

Not everyone has $50k and the time to fight a libel/defamation suit.

True, but the alternative is letting people like this get away just because they have power and/or money. Tough situation to be in.

Not really. She left enough clues that people on HN could figure it all out pretty quickly. Seems like a good middle ground to exposing them but protecting yourself.

California has a broad anti-SLAPP law that would keep this from costing $50K. She would likely win attorney fees as well. IANAL.

That acronym should really not exist.

What's wrong with SLAPP?

I assumed it was a problem with IANAL.

> Is it still libel or defamation if it's all true?

No, but that's part of what would be at issue in a lawsuit.