UPDATE: I mostly retract this comment. It was clarified that the threat was made in a mostly public context which changes the frame for me significantly.
I think it is problematic to post a presumably very private communication (the threat) to such a broad audience. Even when it is correctly attributed it lacks all the context of the situation it was uttered in. It lacks any amends that way or may not have been made and exposes many people to the dynamics of the narrative resulting from the posting here. I’m not saying you shouldn’t post it. I don’t know the context and what you know either. But I think you should take ownership of the consequences of citing it and anyway it might escalate from here (a norm proposed by Scott Adams a while ago).
I don’t think the context in which I heard about this communication was very private. There was a period where Michael seemed to try to get people to attack GiveWell and Holden quite loudly, and the above was part of the things I heard from that time. The above did not to me strike me as a statement intended to be very private, and also my model of Michael has norms that encourage sharing this kind of thing, even if it happens in private communication.
I didn’t downvote, but I almost did because it seems like it’s hard enough to reveal that kind of thing without also having to worry about social disapproval.
UPDATE: I mostly retract this comment. It was clarified that the threat was made in a mostly public context which changes the frame for me significantly.
I think it is problematic to post a presumably very private communication (the threat) to such a broad audience. Even when it is correctly attributed it lacks all the context of the situation it was uttered in. It lacks any amends that way or may not have been made and exposes many people to the dynamics of the narrative resulting from the posting here. I’m not saying you shouldn’t post it. I don’t know the context and what you know either. But I think you should take ownership of the consequences of citing it and anyway it might escalate from here (a norm proposed by Scott Adamsa while ago).I don’t think the context in which I heard about this communication was very private. There was a period where Michael seemed to try to get people to attack GiveWell and Holden quite loudly, and the above was part of the things I heard from that time. The above did not to me strike me as a statement intended to be very private, and also my model of Michael has norms that encourage sharing this kind of thing, even if it happens in private communication.
Thank you for the clarification. I think it is valuable to include this context in your comment.
I will adjust my comment accordingly.
Can somebody give me some hints according to which norms this could be downvoted?
I didn’t downvote, but I almost did because it seems like it’s hard enough to reveal that kind of thing without also having to worry about social disapproval.