Alright 2B, I know neither of us has any patience for a cheeky introduction. Let's just get right into this point by point.

First off, I find it highly amusing that you accuse me of nitpicking when you're literally being guilty  of it in the same thought. You're absolutely right. "Would you accept Alice's apology?" isn't the question you asked. The question you DID ask was: "suppose if Alice2 wanted to speak to you, and offer up some sort of apology, would you be interested?"
If that's not you being nitpicky, I seriously don't know what is. You can give it whatever window dressing you want, but the general thought was still primed on the basis of alice apologizing to the people who worked to dox her. Which is pretty fucked.

I know this was all supposedly orchestrated to gauge the general mood of the people in question to talk to her, but the way you asked it STILL re-enforces the idea to them that they were somehow wronged, and that any conversation would have to involve Alice apologizing for an, as of that moment, still undefined grievance.

Also "because they can't make a real case for why they were wronged" is EXACTLY right. If you want to believe they tried to talk this unknown injustice out with her in the past, you can do exactly that. But you should probably back that up with some EVIDENCE first. As it stands there isn't ANY proof of that. As for Fred confirming this suspicion of yours, he has no idea what you're talking about. Unless of course you're referring to Blu logging into the chat to apologize, before immediately taking it back and then saying she didn't actually mean it.

That's not "talking it out".
I invite you to take this opportunity to correct me.

The only reason getting a direct statement from them is off the table is because we both know any statement they give will probably be bullshit. If you're just gonna sit there and tell me that you can't even GIVE me a reason in THEIR words for WHY they decided to dox my friend, then holy shit. I'm really at the end of my rope here.

If you want to offer your own conjecture that's fine. That's literally been all this has been so far.
But let's discuss it anyway.

Blu.
It's not a false dichotomy so say she either did something out of Malice or Boredom. Those were her two given statements. Either she did something terrible out of boredom or she did it out of Malice. Those statements are contradictory and do not go hand in hand. My point there was that Blu was PROBABLY lying about why she did it the 2nd time when confronted by Fred.
I simply don't buy that someone who had previously stated they "wanted to see" someone "burn" would do something that fucked up out of "boredom".

It's like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, that shit doesn't fucking fit.
I 100% believe she did it with malicious intent. You can choose to believe whatever you wish, but based on her previous comments and the nature of the act itself, I'm going to go with malice.

The Screenshot.
Oh boy, this whole thing is so fucked up from top to bottom it deserves it's own breakdown.
Everything stated there is either a lie, exaggerated or an assumption.

Listen, I know you haven't known Blu that long. (And frankly you have my condolences for having her in your discord.) EVERYONE had a problem with her and her behavior. That isn't an exaggeration. If you don't believe me, I would consult Vimes or hell, even Enth about her.
Enth in fact, had the biggest grievances with her behavior out of anyone I know. Unfortunately I can't show you any examples of this, chat records only go back a year, and everything else I've shown you at this point has either been manually saved or screen-capped.

The only thing that I have on hand that MIGHT speak to this is this old (pretty ironic) screencap I have. https://i.imgur.com/9IM5tRg.png

But we're dealing with the type of person who broke up with her last girlfriend because she had an IMPULSE to tell her to "Fuck off" one time. That should tell you something about the nature of her character. Paranoid and delusional doesn't even begin to cover it.

But I digress, let's get into the specifics of this cap.
First of all, I agree. Blu's doubts were indeed unfounded, and most of the decisions she made that befell her were in fact her own fault.
She was also desperate for validation, something even Alice told her.
Paraphrasing here: "Alice must have seen me as a threat" because "I pass quite well and Alice is a trans woman who refuses to transition and doesn't believe it works."
These two thoughts don't exactly parse. It all hinges on the assumption that Alice is a pre-op transsexual. Which is something she hadn't considered until she attempted to Dox her and got Reaver's information instead. That last statement is also bogus. That stems from a conversation Alice had with Blu where Alice stated that transitioning wouldn't cure depression or solve all of her problems.
Which is absolutely true.

A statement from Alice herself:
Aneki Margatroid: It was literally a link to the study
Aneki Margatroid: showing transitioning does not substantially reduce suicide rates
Aneki Margatroid: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885
Aneki Margatroid: "Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group."
Aneki Margatroid: Am I an asshole for citing the current research? Newer studies coming out JUST THIS YEAR suggest maybe SRS does have a good effect
Aneki Margatroid: But it's still up in the air

I'm not sure what the fuck this "beaten down into submission" shit is about, so I'm just going to ignore it.
Guessing whatever she told her therapist was heavily biased and exaggerated, much like this current sentiment.
As for the money discussion, I remember that as well. That had nothing to do with Blu's pride and satisfaction of herself; what that discussion had to do with was the meaning of what it means to be Middle Class.
It was a financial argument, not a personal attack. Alice after all, works in the finance industry. Alice has never stated she lives paycheck to paycheck. That is a lie.
In fact she's currently employing a few members of the chat for her YouTube channel and game work: Louise, Reimu and up until recently, Vimes.

I'd also like to take this moment to point out that the reason why Blu had any employment at all was because of a suggestion Alice had made.
Alice got her a job through Upwork, both to help her financially support herself and to pad her resume.
I can see that this is something Blu conveniently left that out in all of her diatribes.
Once again, this is something you can feel free to verify with members of the chat who were around during Blu's tenure there.
Alice helping her get a job? That doesn't exactly sound like someone who was jealously targeting her or berating her for her job prospects.

Sharply criticizing someone isn't the same as mistreating them. And they weren't even criticisms, it was information gauged to help Blu gain a better understanding of the realities of her transition and of her financial security.

Blu's paranoid delusions are really poking through here.
And once again, I offer you the opportunity to ask ANYONE else who was around about this.

Alice isn't a bully. The bully in this situation is the one who felt so delusionally persecuted that they decided to bite the hand that was feeding them.
It isn't bullying to give someone realistic expectations.
Doxxing as an intimidation tactic sure as hell is though.
If you truly believe you can get several people to testify on Blu's behalf, I offer you now as the opportunity to do it.

"given this is a reoccurring problem with Alice2, and it has happened with so many people, that I am correct in indicating some internal characteristic."

I would also ask you to back up this statement with specifics.

And as I've demonstrated previously, that screenshot is NOT enough to convince me. I KNOW Blu. I've known her for a lot longer than you have.
And other people know her too. Even Louise had invited her into the discord under the thought that "Blu has changed". She was of course, proven wrong almost immediately.

If you'll grant me that Blu can be "mistaken, reactive, and grandiose", then I please ask you that you believe me when I say that the problems with her are a lot more deep rooted than that.
That just maybe I'm possibly telling the truth. And if my word isn't good enough, maybe trust the word of someone you know better and trust more than me.

Is it truly more likely that Blu is delusional or that I am?

I also don't appreciate the underhanded jab suggesting that I'm indifferent to the suffering of others except in Alice's case. I thought I made thing clear regarding the events of the Makoto incident. An incident in which Alice and I had a pretty intense fight over the well-being of the chat.
I care deeply about the chat, and consider the people in it a sort of family. Ask Fred if you don't believe me. I have even spent sleepless nights talking with Dag, offering him company and advice where he needs it. You see, I still consider Dag my friend even after everything he's done to Alice. I'm aware of the circumstances concerning his choices. If you don't believe me, ask him yourself.

On the Makoto incident I fully agree with you. From the start I was pushing to just have Makoto outright banned. In fact, it was alluded to in that argument I mentioned before.
What Alice instead chose to do was be merciful. She gave Makoto a chance to come clean, and merely changed her name when the time came.
Had it been my choice, we would have just been done with it. Perhaps none of this would have played out the way it had.

But you're right. At this point it's futile to speculate.

And yes thank you, I graduated a couple years ago. Plenty of that knowledge is still stored in my noggin thankfully!
You don't need to remind me that criminology is an ever evolving field, I'm well aware.

Victim Precipitation Theory, Routine Activity Theory and Lifestyle theory all analyze a victims lifestyle choices, associations, upbringing, employment etc. They try to explain what might make them more susceptible to be VICTIMS of a crime.
None of these theories "Blame" the victim. Victim blaming IS quite well defined, and not very controversial.

There is a world of difference between saying someone "Precipitated" their victimhood in a crime and "Blaming" them for it.
It's not nuance or pedanticism, these words have entirely different meanings.

The word you chose to use at the time was that she "Deserved" to be doxxed. NOT that she "precipitated" her own doxxing.
These two thoughts are VASTLY different, believe me.

You can't accuse me of intellectual dishonesty while moving your goalpost to the fucking moon.
I WILL agree that, in some form, Alice precipitated her own doxxing on the basis of a decision she made almost a decade ago.
Where we disagree is on the metrics of her behavior to and treatment of, Blu and Enth.

But at this point, that is neither here nor there. You changed the phrasing of your original statement, and fundamentally changed the entire meaning of it.
If you're just going to retcon what you said, you might as well just fucking apologize for saying the wrong thing in the first place. Even if it's just on that basis alone, at least that's fucking something.

I'd like to believe you're virtuous as well, 2B. I really would.
I initially thought you were just being a cunt, hence my harsh language and lack of respect. But as I'm learning more about you, I'm beginning to think maybe you really do just have a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation.

So far your argument against Alice is propped up on the word of someone we know to be grandiose and delusional, and from someone romantically linked to another that was fairly removed from that chat.
Both of their main justifications have also been discredited.

And now you're changing the words and meaning of what you've originally said, to something I can almost agree with.

So I don't know what's left, 2B.
You can continue believing to believe their word against my evidence.
You can continue to believe the nature of their character against ours.

But I'd implore you to at least try to get to the truth of it, and not to automatically side with one part of the issue.

I would really like to hope we're closer to some greater understanding here.