New censorship: against hypothetical violence against identifiable people

New pro­posed cen­sor­ship policy:

Any post or com­ment which ad­vo­cates or ‘asks about’ vi­o­lence against suffi­ciently iden­ti­fi­able real peo­ple or groups (as op­posed to aliens or hy­po­thet­i­cal peo­ple on trol­ley tracks) may be deleted, along with replies that also con­tain the info nec­es­sary to vi­su­al­ize vi­o­lence against real peo­ple.

Rea­son: Talk­ing about such vi­o­lence makes that vi­o­lence more prob­a­ble, and makes LW look bad; and nu­mer­ous mes­sage boards across the Earth cen­sor dis­cus­sion of var­i­ous sub­types of pro­posed crim­i­nal ac­tivity with­out any­thing bad hap­pen­ing to them.

More gen­er­ally: Posts or com­ments ad­vo­cat­ing or ‘ask­ing about’ vi­o­la­tion of laws that are ac­tu­ally en­forced against mid­dle-class peo­ple (e.g., kid­nap­ping, not anti-mar­ijuana laws) may at the ad­mins’ op­tion be cen­sored on the grounds that it makes LW look bad and that any­one talk­ing about a pro­posed crime on the In­ter­net fails for­ever as a crim­i­nal (i.e., even if a pro­posed con­spir­a­to­rial crime were in fact good, there would still be net nega­tive ex­pected util­ity from talk­ing about it on the In­ter­net; if it’s a bad idea, pro­mot­ing it con­cep­tu­ally by dis­cussing it is also a bad idea; there­fore and in full gen­er­al­ity this is a low-value form of dis­cus­sion).

This is not a poll, but I am ask­ing in ad­vance if any­one has non-ob­vi­ous con­se­quences they want to point out or policy con­sid­er­a­tions they would like to raise. In other words, the form of this dis­cus­sion is not ‘Do you like this?’ - you prob­a­bly have a differ­ent cost func­tion from peo­ple who are held re­spon­si­ble for how LW looks as a whole—but rather, ‘Are there any pre­dictable con­se­quences we didn’t think of that you would like to point out, and pos­si­bly bet on with us if there’s a good way to set­tle the bet?’

Yes, a post of this type was just re­cently made. I will not link to it, since this cen­sor­ship policy im­plies that it will shortly be deleted, and re­pro­duc­ing the info nec­es­sary to say who was hy­po­thet­i­cally tar­geted and why would be against the policy.