This is no fairer than saying any given Catholic must be a paedophile priest, any given Muslim must be a Salafi, or any given hippy must take LSD and sleep with strangers.
"Using the handle xirbeosbwo1234, <your name> posted on Hacker News, a forum where rich San Franciscan tech CEOs and thought leaders could talk about everything from the infamous Damore memo, to Trump advisor Peter Thiel, to race relations and the BLM movement. On an article from Reason magazine, a fiercely libertarian media outlet, he gleefully ventured opinions on monarchy and race realism. For him, the site was a space where the worst consequences he faced were downvotes and the disbelief of his equally pseudonymous peers."
The NYT article is perfectly fair. It states that Scott Alexander has sharply criticized neoreactionaries, which is true. It states that he has been a frequent critic of so-called SJWs and has written about possible genetic causes of some of the racial and sexual inequities we see in society, which is also true. Those things are part of the story. You are the one trying to leave them out.
Once you start having scholars and other official positions in the hierarchy of discussion, you can't just ignore what you don't like any more.