Given that people are sharing evidence on Torres, I thought I would chime in. I agree it would have been better for the OP to share with Zoe before posting, but I also think working with Torres is a mistake.
My relationship with Torres started after I criticised something he wrote about Steven Pinker on Facebook—my critique was about 3 sentences. My critique was supported by others in the community, including Will MacAskill. I think this was the start of Torres becoming disenchanted with EA.
From this point on, he published several now infamous pieces suggesting that I and others in EA support white supremacy. He also sent me numerous messages on Facebook after I had stopped responding. In this Facebook post, Torres inexplicably namechecks me while he is accusing some people of being rapists/paedophiles (their names are redacted)
My whole experience with Torres has been surreal—for one small piece of criticism, he went after me for years. I know he has done the same to others: some people he has gone after have needed counselling, and I think people should take that into account when they interact with Torres.
For people who are confused that Torres, who wrote a book defending the FHI-house view of x-risk in 2017 and endorsed that view until his review of Pinker in 2019, now thinks EA is so bad, it seems to be because he thinks he faced some rejection by the community.
“In this Facebook post, Torres inexplicably namechecks me while he is accusing some people of being rapists/paedophiles (their names are redacted)”
When was this post from—before or after he was banned from the forum over attacking you a bit over a year ago? Given that he’s repeatedly made malicious claims about you in the past couple years, this seems a bit inexplicable. Because if it’s actually referring to someone who was on Epstein’s jet, this seems mostly justifiable, other than the weird decision to name-check you. Or was this from before the vendetta started?
hi david, this was from before he was banned from the forum but after his beef with me started—this was while he was doing all the white supremacy articles about me, beckstead and others. he had a long-standing dispute with the people mentioned, and independently at the time he was especially annoyed at me for criticising him. I think that is what led him to namecheck me in his allegation.
I hadn’t heard of one of the people he was accusing at the time that he wrote the facebook post. I have no idea whether or not the allegations are true, I just don’t understand why he involved me in them.
EA Forum moderators take note: I believe the individual above is the same who created these two Twitter accounts just a few days ago, both of which were used to harass me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/xriskology/status/1569401706999595009. I have screenshots of many of our exchanges if you’d like. Harassment on social media should warrant being banned from this website, especially when the harasser continues to conceal their identity. Please act.
(EDIT: Please note also that this “throwaway” account was created just this month. Are you, as a community, okay with people creating anonymous Twitter accounts and anonymous EA Forum accounts to share misleading and out-of-context screenshots about someone? If so, I’ll make a note of it.)
Please note also that this “throwaway” account was created just this month.
My prior is that the reason Throwaway151 posted under a new anonymous account is not that they want to harass you. Rather, it’s that there is public evidence that you yourself harass (evidence: your exchanges with Peter Boghossian) those who you perceive to be your enemies. Anonymity is not ideal but it’s understandable given your history, in my opinion, even if you’ve admitted to and apologized for some of this past conduct.
Again, it goes without saying that none of this would justify Throwaway151 harassing you in turn, but I see no evidence that that has happened.
If by “share misleading and out-of-context screenshots about someone” you are referring to the screenshots posted above, I disagree strongly with this characterization. From what I can tell, the screenshots are not misleading, and the additional context you provided doesn’t change what I take away from the screenshots: you have a history of online interactions with perceived enemies that are reasonably construed as menacing and upsetting.
In addition, the screenshot Halstead shared strongly adds to this impression.
My prior is that the reason Throwaway151 posted under a new anonymous account is not that they want to harass you.
Yeah, given the extensive documentation that the Throwaway151 account posted of years worth of Torres’ falsehoods, I think it’s absolutely clear that it’s someone who has far more than a passing interest, and that even if the post wasn’t malicious, it was at least negligently defamatory, given that they admitted that no effort went into verifying any of the original claim.
I think that anonymity encouraged/enabled the negligence and was for that reason and to that extent bad. That’s different from trying to harass Torres. Any malice or negligent defamation has been towards Cremer and Kemp.
I was just saying that a major reason Throwaway151 could reasonably desire anonymity is Torres’s verifiable track record (see other comments on this post) of harassment. So anonymity is less evidence of ill intent than it would otherwise be. Of course, if Throwaway151 has in fact harassed Torres on Twitter as Torres claims, that is terrible. (I maintain that nothing Throwaway151 has done on the Forum constitutes harassment of Torres.)
Related small point: I think you mean “years worth of Torres’s menacing behavior”, not “years worth of Torres’s falsehoods”. As far as I can tell there aren’t actually any lies in that thread, just unnerving behavior.
Are you, as a community, okay with people creating anonymous Twitter accounts and anonymous EA Forum accounts to share misleading and out-of-context screenshots about someone?
I am confident I speak for the community when I say: no, absolutely not. If you are being harassed on Twitter, by Throwaway151 or by anyone else, that is wrong and unacceptable. I’d be especially angry and concerned if Twitter harassment is coming from EAs, and I emphatically condemn any such behavior.
Harassment on social media should warrant being banned from this website, especially when the harasser continues to conceal their identity.
I agree, and I expect the moderation team to take action if they have sufficient compelling evidence that this is in fact what has happened.
(a) This is taken out of context. (b) My “prank” was intended to mimic precisely what these far-right trolls were doing. (c) I realized in retrospect that stooping to their level was no good. (d) I repeatedly, publicly, and honestly apologized for acting like them (in this one particular case; it was the only time I did anything like this). (e) I continue to apologies for the momentary lapse of judgment. I am sorry for it. I thought it would be funny to mimic them, but I think I was wrong. (f) Michael Shermer has been accused by many women of harassment, assault, and r*pe. I mentioned that in a Salon article, and he went ballistic. No one should trust what he says about me. This is not good epistemics.
(a) To be honest, I doubt that there could be a “context” that would make your email look anything other than menacing and stalkerish. But I would be happy to hear what that context is. That is a pretty serious charges and I don’t want to update on misleading or selective evidence.
Given that people are sharing evidence on Torres, I thought I would chime in. I agree it would have been better for the OP to share with Zoe before posting, but I also think working with Torres is a mistake.
My relationship with Torres started after I criticised something he wrote about Steven Pinker on Facebook—my critique was about 3 sentences. My critique was supported by others in the community, including Will MacAskill. I think this was the start of Torres becoming disenchanted with EA.
From this point on, he published several now infamous pieces suggesting that I and others in EA support white supremacy. He also sent me numerous messages on Facebook after I had stopped responding. In this Facebook post, Torres inexplicably namechecks me while he is accusing some people of being rapists/paedophiles (their names are redacted)
My whole experience with Torres has been surreal—for one small piece of criticism, he went after me for years. I know he has done the same to others: some people he has gone after have needed counselling, and I think people should take that into account when they interact with Torres.
For people who are confused that Torres, who wrote a book defending the FHI-house view of x-risk in 2017 and endorsed that view until his review of Pinker in 2019, now thinks EA is so bad, it seems to be because he thinks he faced some rejection by the community.
“In this Facebook post, Torres inexplicably namechecks me while he is accusing some people of being rapists/paedophiles (their names are redacted)”
When was this post from—before or after he was banned from the forum over attacking you a bit over a year ago? Given that he’s repeatedly made malicious claims about you in the past couple years, this seems a bit inexplicable. Because if it’s actually referring to someone who was on Epstein’s jet, this seems mostly justifiable, other than the weird decision to name-check you. Or was this from before the vendetta started?
hi david, this was from before he was banned from the forum but after his beef with me started—this was while he was doing all the white supremacy articles about me, beckstead and others. he had a long-standing dispute with the people mentioned, and independently at the time he was especially annoyed at me for criticising him. I think that is what led him to namecheck me in his allegation.
I hadn’t heard of one of the people he was accusing at the time that he wrote the facebook post. I have no idea whether or not the allegations are true, I just don’t understand why he involved me in them.
Thanks for clarifying!
EA Forum moderators take note: I believe the individual above is the same who created these two Twitter accounts just a few days ago, both of which were used to harass me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/xriskology/status/1569401706999595009. I have screenshots of many of our exchanges if you’d like. Harassment on social media should warrant being banned from this website, especially when the harasser continues to conceal their identity. Please act.
(EDIT: Please note also that this “throwaway” account was created just this month. Are you, as a community, okay with people creating anonymous Twitter accounts and anonymous EA Forum accounts to share misleading and out-of-context screenshots about someone? If so, I’ll make a note of it.)
My prior is that the reason Throwaway151 posted under a new anonymous account is not that they want to harass you. Rather, it’s that there is public evidence that you yourself harass (evidence: your exchanges with Peter Boghossian) those who you perceive to be your enemies. Anonymity is not ideal but it’s understandable given your history, in my opinion, even if you’ve admitted to and apologized for some of this past conduct.
Again, it goes without saying that none of this would justify Throwaway151 harassing you in turn, but I see no evidence that that has happened.
If by “share misleading and out-of-context screenshots about someone” you are referring to the screenshots posted above, I disagree strongly with this characterization. From what I can tell, the screenshots are not misleading, and the additional context you provided doesn’t change what I take away from the screenshots: you have a history of online interactions with perceived enemies that are reasonably construed as menacing and upsetting.
In addition, the screenshot Halstead shared strongly adds to this impression.
Yeah, given the extensive documentation that the Throwaway151 account posted of years worth of Torres’ falsehoods, I think it’s absolutely clear that it’s someone who has far more than a passing interest, and that even if the post wasn’t malicious, it was at least negligently defamatory, given that they admitted that no effort went into verifying any of the original claim.
I think that anonymity encouraged/enabled the negligence and was for that reason and to that extent bad. That’s different from trying to harass Torres. Any malice or negligent defamation has been towards Cremer and Kemp.
I was just saying that a major reason Throwaway151 could reasonably desire anonymity is Torres’s verifiable track record (see other comments on this post) of harassment. So anonymity is less evidence of ill intent than it would otherwise be. Of course, if Throwaway151 has in fact harassed Torres on Twitter as Torres claims, that is terrible. (I maintain that nothing Throwaway151 has done on the Forum constitutes harassment of Torres.)
Related small point: I think you mean “years worth of Torres’s menacing behavior”, not “years worth of Torres’s falsehoods”. As far as I can tell there aren’t actually any lies in that thread, just unnerving behavior.
I am confident I speak for the community when I say: no, absolutely not. If you are being harassed on Twitter, by Throwaway151 or by anyone else, that is wrong and unacceptable. I’d be especially angry and concerned if Twitter harassment is coming from EAs, and I emphatically condemn any such behavior.
I agree, and I expect the moderation team to take action if they have sufficient compelling evidence that this is in fact what has happened.
The mentioned tweet seems to no longer be available. Could you provide screenshots?
It is available, there is just a typo such that there is a period included at the end of the hyperlink. Just take off the period.
(a) This is taken out of context. (b) My “prank” was intended to mimic precisely what these far-right trolls were doing. (c) I realized in retrospect that stooping to their level was no good. (d) I repeatedly, publicly, and honestly apologized for acting like them (in this one particular case; it was the only time I did anything like this). (e) I continue to apologies for the momentary lapse of judgment. I am sorry for it. I thought it would be funny to mimic them, but I think I was wrong. (f) Michael Shermer has been accused by many women of harassment, assault, and r*pe. I mentioned that in a Salon article, and he went ballistic. No one should trust what he says about me. This is not good epistemics.
(a) To be honest, I doubt that there could be a “context” that would make your email look anything other than menacing and stalkerish. But I would be happy to hear what that context is. That is a pretty serious charges and I don’t want to update on misleading or selective evidence.