Alicorn, if a "should this be moderated" poll is required anywhere in this thread this is the kind of trolling that needs to be targeted. Way across the line.
What is way across the line is when people start asking about "secretes" and basilisks and there is any chance of such possibilities being taken seriously. What is way across the line is when an organisations tries to actively impede research.
Some harsh words are completely appropriate then.
I have no problem with Will Newsome and find a lot of his output enjoyable. But if he starts to lend credibility to crazy shit like basilisks in the minds of people then that has to be said.
Thank you for your cooperation and understanding. Don't worry, there won't be future posts like this, so you don't have to delete my LessWrong account, and anyway I could make another, and another.
But since you've dared to read this far:
Credibility. Should you maximize it, or minimize it? Have I made an error?
Discuss.
Don't be shallow, don't just consider the obvious points. Consider that I've thought about this for many, many hours, and that you don't have any privileged information. Whence our disagreement, if one exists?