It is there with folks who know about those people and feel connected to them. SSC has a lot of it's audience on HN. Hence you see the outrage here. People can't feel similarly outraged by every doxxing since they have limited time, energy, and emotional bandwidth. If people were forced to worry about issues just on their impact, a large number of kids are starving in Africa, and by that logic people shouldn't worry about anything else till they can do something about that.

In my opinion the best reason people are interested in this situation is Scott Alexander is considered to be NOT someone who will unquestioningly ride an empty wave of reactionary outrage if it's pointed in an advantageous direction:

People are hoping rational thought can be used to change norms when something bad happens.

That's why this is interesting and different than a thousand other sad situations involving people who likely don't have the tools to solve it in that way.

Care to link a few examples of "at risk" people doxxed by the NYT?