Do you have a source for that? Beyond the NYT piece, which is so laughable it does hit pieces a disservice by being grouped with them.

The NYT piece didn't even say that; it said that he supported genocide (??), which is similar, but I don't remember it saying that he courted neo-Nazis. (Or was that one of the heavily-implied things I was oblivious to?)

Perhaps it was more implying they were welcomed?

> The voices also included white supremacists and neo-fascists. The only people who struggled to be heard... were “social justice warriors.”

I've read a lot of his stuff and have never heard about that. Would you want to provide a link that supports your claim, so I can make an informed decision about continuing to read his generally good, substantive, and interesting content?

I read through the comments he made in the images attached to those tweets, and I don't personally find what he's saying there to be especially problematic. I certainly don't read anything he's saying there as being motivated by racism, hatred, or alt-right political views.

I still really appreciate you backing up your post with a link and the chance to dig into his sources. Thanks for the link.

It shouldn't be hard for a grownup to read his texts even if that were true.

And that's "Mr. Alexander" to you, GP.

... nah.

It's not that it's hard to read his texts, and sometimes there's still some good stuff in there. It's that once someone shows bad judgment you have to think about how that manifests, and that manifests in poor thinking that's well-disguised.

Once you know a clock is broken don't use it to tell the time.

Yeah, I guess I somewhat deliberately misinterpreted you. I should know better...

I'm pretty sure you've been lied to about this though.

That Twitter link is mostly unreadable, but what's in human font size is just vague gossip from some angry dude on Twitter.

I also followed up on the link. I was able to open the image links in separate tabs to get them to load. There's a whole bunch of commentary from Scott there that I'd say is worth reading to understand where impassionata is coming from. I don't personally agree with their take, but there _is_ actual substantive content at the link.