[Agreeing with Stalin that 2+2=4 is fine; the problem is a sustained pattern of _selectively_ bring up pro-Party points while ignoring anti-Party facts that would otherwise be relevant to the topic of interest, including stonewalling commenters who try to point out relevance]
[Tweet said "I've never persuaded anyone to go trans" in light of his track record; is like thinking it's personally prudent and not community-harmful to bash Democrats and praise Republicans. If any possible good thing about Democrats is something you mention that "the other side" would say. Even if you can truthfully say "I've never _told_ anyone to _vote_ Republican", you shouldn't be surprised if people regard you as a Republican shill ; the "30% of the ones with penises" proclamation sort of was encouraging it, really!]
+
+https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10154110278349228
+> Just checked my filtered messages on Facebook and saw, "Your post last night was kind of the final thing I needed to realize that I'm a girl."
+> ==DOES ALL OF THE HAPPY DANCE FOREVER==
-----
-Do you particularly _care_ if I publish two blog posts that say some negative things about you? (That is, not just responding to object-level arguments, but also going into stuff like, "And I think Yudkowsky was being culpably intellectually dishonest here in the following sense based on the following evidence [...]". I used to trust you as a general-purpose intellectual authority, but I think you've made it very clear that you don't think you can politically afford being worthy of that level of trust, and I think I have a legitimate interest in writing about that.)
+Subject: blessing to speak freely, and privacy norms?
-If you actually _care_ about potential reputational damage to you from my writing the things that I think I have a legitimate interest in writing about, I'd be willing to let you pre-read the drafts before publishing and give you the chance to object to anything you think is unfair.
+Dear Eliezer:
-But I don't want to waste any more of your time, and it's a lot harder to write when I'm spending more time worrying about what you'd think of me, than on saying the things I need to say.
+Do you particularly _care_ if I publish a couple blog posts that say some negative things about you? (That is, not just responding to object-level arguments, but also explaining why I think you've been culpably intellectually dishonest. I used to trust you as a general-purpose intellectual authority, but I think you've made it very clear that you don't think you can politically afford being worthy of that level of trust, and I think I have a legitimate interest in writing about why you're Not My Caliph.)
-But since you probably _don't_ particularly care (because it's not AGI alignment and therefore unimportant), **may I please have your blessing to just write and publish what I'm thinking so I can get it all out of my system and move on with my life?**
+If you actually _care_ about potential reputational damage to you from my writing things that I think I have a legitimate interest in writing about, I would be _willing_ to let you pre-read the drafts before publishing and give you the chance to object to anything you think is unfair ...
-I would assume that the privacy norm applying to our previous interactions is that I'm allowed to
+But I'd rather agree that that's not necessary. I don't want to waste any more of your time, and I'm noticing it's a lot harder to write when I'm spending more time worrying about what you'd think of me, than on saying the things I need to say. (Because I still have an extremely messed-up cult-leader hero-worship betrayal-trauma silencing complex around you.)
+So, since you probably _don't_ particularly care (because it's not AGI alignment and therefore unimportant), **may I please have your advance blessing to just write and publish what I'm thinking so I can get it all out of my system and move on with my life?**
-
-I remain,
+I would assume that the privacy norm applying to me writing about our previous interactions is that I'm obviously allowed to talk about my actions, but that I can't quote your side of private conversations (_e.g._, I can mention _making_ Cheerful Price offers, but have to Glomarize as to whether you accepted), but I am allowed to _anonymously_ quote things I remember you saying (_e.g._, at the Independence Day party; if I say "Someone advised me that I was living in the should-universe, and I said [...]", and some readers could speculate that "someone" was you, that's not my fault). I don't think you can reasonably object to this, but tell me if you somehow do. I remain,
Your faithful student,
Zack M. Davis