I'm not really sure what your point is with this post.

These are the reasons I choose to be non-abusive and to send a message to the world that non-abusive intellectuals exist.

If it's just that, I think the post would benefit from better focus. More likely, it would be better to conclude with something more related to the content of the post itself.

Also, I'm not sure how this

I have noticed a current of elitism on LessWrong.

jives with this

If people tell you that you're an elitist because you want a challenging social environment to learn in, or because you want to make the project that is the LessWrong blog as high quality as it can be, you can refuse to be labeled guilty.

You talk about people being elitist on the site, and that this concerns you, and as evidence you point to an upvoted comment to which you replied stating that they were using "elitism" differently from you. In fact, it seems like you would actually endorse their statement if not for the use of the word. I don't think it's worthwhile to argue about definitions (as others have mentioned w/r/t your quoting of the dictionary), but also I wonder what you're concerned about if the "current of elitism" is just people wanting to have a challenging, high quality, environment, as is stated in the comment you point to.

Finally, and this is minor, you refer a couple of times to "Yvain's 'the worst mistake'" when I think you're talking about his "the worst argument in the world," which seems clunky and kind of confusing, and using the phrase "guilt by association" is probably better avoided due to its more common use.