Of course.
The goal isn't to match the opponent, the goal is an effective strategy to further your own ends. Complete pacifism in the face of abuse is probably not it.
What do you mean by "complete pacifism"?
The way to fight someone how spreads lies about you is not to spread lies about them, it's to spread the truth about them.
Scott, known on LessWrong as Yvain, recently wrote a post complaining about an inaccurate rape statistic.
Arthur Chu, who is notable for winning money on Jeopardy recently, argued against Scott's stance that we should be honest in arguments in a comment thread on Jeff Kaufman's Facebook profile, which can be read here.
Scott just responded here, with a number of points relevant to the topic of rationalist communities.
I am interested in what LW thinks of this.
Obviously, at some point being polite in our arguments is silly. I'd be interested in people's opinions of how dire the real world consequences have to be before it's worthwhile debating dishonestly.