The thing you have to understand about the ardent small-blockers is that they really genuinely believe they are protecting Bitcoin from a very real existential threat. If Bitcoin's security properties get diminished, there's no going back, no undoes or fixing the problem. It is a permanent change that irreparably weakens Bitcoin. What you view as overly zealous conservatism they view as appropriate caution given the risks involved. Now, I happen to think even given the risks that they are overly conservative, and I support a hard fork blocksize increase... but I don't begrudge them for sticking to their guns when from their point of view, they are defending Bitcoin's very existence from what they perceive as a very real threat that might destroy Bitcoin.
Yeah, I wouldn't completely destroy someones opinion for doing what they think is right. Even if I, and the quote above me aren't keen on supporting their opinion you have to give it to them for fighting with ALL SIDES in a time where a good amount of people are coming out saying that WE NEED to fix this network.Though, I will have to agree with Theymos and others that I think we're going to have to work out the kinks of a block increase as there's going to be some issues with Bitcoin coming out after it-- I don't think this threat is as serious as they think it is, but I will acknowledge it is also there.
I don't think he's been hacked either, he's just supporting his side and his groups side leave the man be.