Scott Alexander is the most politically charitable person I know. Him being driven off the internet is terrible. Separately, it is also terrible if we have totally failed to internalise his lessons, and immediately leap to the conclusion that the NYT is being evil or selfish.

Ours is a community *built around* the long-term value of telling the truth. Are we unable to imagine reasonable disagreement about when the benefits of revealing real names outweigh the harms? Yes, it goes against our norms, but different groups have different norms.

If the extended rationalist/SSC community could cancel the NYT, would we? For planning to doxx Scott? For actually doing so, as a dumb mistake? For doing so, but for principled reasons? Would we give those reasons fair hearing? From what I& #39;ve seen so far, I suspect not.

I feel very sorry for Scott, and really hope the NYT doesn& #39;t doxx him or anyone else. But if you claim to be charitable and openminded, except when confronted by a test that affects your own community, then you& #39;re using those words as performative weapons, deliberately or not.