What do you mean by rejecting someone entirely, and why does it entail not talking to them when you'd find this helpful?
Is this about
punishment through the psychological effects of social isolation?
punishment through some other effect of social isolation?
concern about being manipulated?
a "good guy" talking to a "bad guy" may be helpful, but a "bad guy" talking to another "bad guy" lets them coordinate to do bad things, therefore we apply social pressure to prevent anyone from talking to someone we've identified as a "bad guy"?
If someone committed a bunch of money to defend you in a defamation lawsuit, would that help?
Do you have a sense for roughly how much money committed would be needed to substantially reduce the risk-to-you of a defamation lawsuit?
This sounds like a great reason to give young adults $50k, but if someone is giving young adults $50k for this reason, I don't see why they would add a requirement that they be spent on "academic expenses".
INCLUDING ACCUSING ONE GAY PERSON OF ASSAULTING A FEMALE. WHICH FEMALE SAID HE DIDN'T DO
When the underage female got contacted to confirm this, SHE WAS OUTRAGED BECAUSE THEY NEVER HAD ANY INTERCOURSE AND THE EX OF the ACCUSED GUY USED HER NAME IN A STORY AGAINST HER WILL.
Would any of these females be willing publicly say so?
Also, what was communication in this group house / social group like; when the co-head accused people of sexual assault, is it safe for me to assume that there's a record of that accusation?
HER BLACKMAIL HAS BEEN RECORDED TOO (can be shared here upon request).
By blackmail, do you mean saying "Get me the lease by Friday at Midnight or I will go to the press, lawyers, and the police with these accusations." or something else?
(If people aren't willing to talk about this publicly, but anyone who knows me can confirm or disconfirm any of this, please reach out to me!)
I did not want to tell the full severity of the story because I genuinely care about the Effective Altruism movement, and though numerous individual actors behaved in a coordinated and awful way, I still see the promise in having a positive conversation about how the movement can change.
Can you be more specific here; were you declining to tell the full severity of the story in order to protect the reputation of the EA movement? I would prefer you didn't do that (but by the same logic, if you did, I very much appreciate you [EDIT: saying] so!). We can have a discussion about the relative merits of reputation vs integrity (as in https://sideways-view.com/2016/11/14/integrity-for-consequentialists/ ; I don't endorse all the reasoning in that post) but I don't really know where to start.
Separately, I would prefer if you share more of the evidence regardless of your reasons against doing so. Please let me know if I can do anything to make you or others more comfortable doing so!
What do you mean by "concerns about the other half of the FTX/Alameda split"?
What do you mean by rejecting someone entirely, and why does it entail not talking to them when you'd find this helpful? Is this about
If someone committed a bunch of money to defend you in a defamation lawsuit, would that help? Do you have a sense for roughly how much money committed would be needed to substantially reduce the risk-to-you of a defamation lawsuit?
This sounds like a great reason to give young adults $50k, but if someone is giving young adults $50k for this reason, I don't see why they would add a requirement that they be spent on "academic expenses".
Would any of these females be willing publicly say so?
Also, what was communication in this group house / social group like; when the co-head accused people of sexual assault, is it safe for me to assume that there's a record of that accusation?
By blackmail, do you mean saying "Get me the lease by Friday at Midnight or I will go to the press, lawyers, and the police with these accusations." or something else?
(If people aren't willing to talk about this publicly, but anyone who knows me can confirm or disconfirm any of this, please reach out to me!)
What happens to people on this blacklist?
Can you be more specific here; were you declining to tell the full severity of the story in order to protect the reputation of the EA movement? I would prefer you didn't do that (but by the same logic, if you did, I very much appreciate you [EDIT: saying] so!). We can have a discussion about the relative merits of reputation vs integrity (as in https://sideways-view.com/2016/11/14/integrity-for-consequentialists/ ; I don't endorse all the reasoning in that post) but I don't really know where to start.
Separately, I would prefer if you share more of the evidence regardless of your reasons against doing so. Please let me know if I can do anything to make you or others more comfortable doing so!
This comment is currently at -6 agreement votes. Does anyone want to explain to me why this is so?
Thanks; what has Avraham done that makes him longtermist? Did he / does he identify as longtermist?
I'm not aware of the two separate theft incidents (or forgot about one), can you tell me more about them?