An alleged sexual abuser who’s been banned from the community for some years. Normally I’d go with “name and shame” but iirc the accusers specifically did not want that to happen. See my earlier notes here.
(I gave it a small-downvote) I currently think that representation of the person in question is pretty inaccurate. I have various problems with them, one of the primary ones is that they threatened an EA community institution with a libel lawsuit, which you might have picked up I am not a huge fan of, but your comment to me seemed to be more likely to mislead (and to somewhat miasmically propagate a narrative I consider untrustworthy), and also that specific request for privacy still strikes me as illegitimate (as I have commented on the relevant posts).
your comment to me seemed to be more likely to mislead (and to somewhat miasmically propagate a narrative I consider untrustworthy)
Do you have a probability that the figure in question is sexually abusive? (Defined as “with full knowledge of the facts, >60% of readers of this comment would consider my original description fair, even after dropping the word ‘alleged.’”)
I didn’t look into the allegations myself because from my perspective, my opinion on that particular Voldemort figure seems more than a bit overdetermined. (But I agree that it’d be bad to falsely propagate an untrue narrative about a specific deficiency).
and also that specific request for privacy still strikes me as illegitimate
Fair. I’m pretty confused about the relevant norms here, I think (as I’m sure you/Ben/Lightcone have noticed) getting whistleblowers to talk is sometimes quite difficult, so respecting their wishes seems like a good heuristic/policy. But I haven’t thought about that particular policy in detail either.
Who’s the other example?
An alleged sexual abuser who’s been banned from the community for some years. Normally I’d go with “name and shame” but iirc the accusers specifically did not want that to happen. See my earlier notes here.
Confused about the downvotes.
(I gave it a small-downvote) I currently think that representation of the person in question is pretty inaccurate. I have various problems with them, one of the primary ones is that they threatened an EA community institution with a libel lawsuit, which you might have picked up I am not a huge fan of, but your comment to me seemed to be more likely to mislead (and to somewhat miasmically propagate a narrative I consider untrustworthy), and also that specific request for privacy still strikes me as illegitimate (as I have commented on the relevant posts).
Do you have a probability that the figure in question is sexually abusive? (Defined as “with full knowledge of the facts, >60% of readers of this comment would consider my original description fair, even after dropping the word ‘alleged.’”)
I didn’t look into the allegations myself because from my perspective, my opinion on that particular Voldemort figure seems more than a bit overdetermined. (But I agree that it’d be bad to falsely propagate an untrue narrative about a specific deficiency).
Fair. I’m pretty confused about the relevant norms here, I think (as I’m sure you/Ben/Lightcone have noticed) getting whistleblowers to talk is sometimes quite difficult, so respecting their wishes seems like a good heuristic/policy. But I haven’t thought about that particular policy in detail either.