I think you’re missing an option, though. You can specifically disavow and oppose the malicious actions/actors, and point out that they are not part of your cause, and are actively hurting it. No censorship, just clarity that this hurts you and the cause. Depending on your knowledge of the perpetrators and the crimes, backing this up by turning them or actively thwarting them may be in scope as well.
There is a practical issue with this solution in the era of modern social media. Suppose you have malicious actors who go on to act in your name, but you never would have associated yourself with them under normal circumstances because they don’t represent your values. If you tell them to stand down or condemn them, then you’ve associated yourself with them, and that condemnation can be used against you.
To be clear, “stand down” is not condemning. “F them and their destructive actions” is condemning. In more formal settings, “I do not support X, and I do not want anything to do with people doing X”.
A few examples of clear condemnation being used against someone, where that retaliation is worse than the implied association of doing nothing, would help me understand your comment.
Note that If they’re not ALREADY associated with you in some way (through their actions and publicity, referencing your reputation without your consent), you don’t need to respond in any way. That’s a pretty easy option 4, I think.
There is a practical issue with this solution in the era of modern social media. Suppose you have malicious actors who go on to act in your name, but you never would have associated yourself with them under normal circumstances because they don’t represent your values. If you tell them to stand down or condemn them, then you’ve associated yourself with them, and that condemnation can be used against you.
To be clear, “stand down” is not condemning. “F them and their destructive actions” is condemning. In more formal settings, “I do not support X, and I do not want anything to do with people doing X”.
A few examples of clear condemnation being used against someone, where that retaliation is worse than the implied association of doing nothing, would help me understand your comment.
Note that If they’re not ALREADY associated with you in some way (through their actions and publicity, referencing your reputation without your consent), you don’t need to respond in any way. That’s a pretty easy option 4, I think.