There was a thread on LW about potential information hazards[0] - in particular, a kind created by the special flavor of decision theory which was being developed there. This was one of the "peculiar out there" kind of stuff LW people like to play with. Here comes Roko, who says that he created a potential hazardous piece of information - a thing that if you know it, you're fucked - that could lead to people suffering, and then
posts it right there. Eliezer deleted the comment, claiming Roko is being irresponsible (and wrong, but still irresponsible if he believed that what he posted was a hazard), and the topic of what became known as Roko's basilisk was banned from discussion for some time.
Eliezer's argument was that Roko behaved unethically by posting something he claimed to believe will hurt people who will read it. That's irrelevant to whether the post itself was an information hazard or not. Eliezer actually later claimed it wasn't, that Roko was wrong. But the whole situation ended up being used to prove the point that LW people are loonies who invent and believe crazy things.
Hence my analogy, in which one person is rightfully angry at another, but ends up being painted as having issues instead.
[0] - https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Information_hazard