To the extent that this implies that LessWrong is reacting badly to valid criticisms (and I apologise if you’re not)....
That state of affairs (“good post” → “we don’t like” → “please leave”) seems less likely than “bad post” → “we don’t like” → “please leave”. You have to posit that the post’s claims are true and that we react badly to these true claims, whereas the “bad post” state doesn’t require truthiness of claims and gets “react badly” as a given. I tentatively accept your hypothesis as possible but I’d like a little more evidence before I consider it plausible.
To the extent that this implies that LessWrong is reacting badly to valid criticisms (and I apologise if you’re not)....
That state of affairs (“good post” → “we don’t like” → “please leave”) seems less likely than “bad post” → “we don’t like” → “please leave”. You have to posit that the post’s claims are true and that we react badly to these true claims, whereas the “bad post” state doesn’t require truthiness of claims and gets “react badly” as a given. I tentatively accept your hypothesis as possible but I’d like a little more evidence before I consider it plausible.