Mentioning philosophy on the internet is a good way to start arguments, so if you're trying to do that you'll probably succeed. There is a more concise phrasin

Mentioning philosophy on the internet is a good way to start arguments, so if you're trying to do that you'll probably succeed. There is a more concise phrasing for the idea you seem to be trying to get at - decision theory has to consider the fact that the decision makers in the real world that we live in have finite resources. There are an infinite number of potential Roko Basilisks (all religions and all theoretically describable religions of which Roko's is one). Since the decision maker doesn't have enough resources to deal with all of them, they end up having to ignore the basilisk in practice. There isn't really a question here about alignment in the Roko scenario, the argument falls apart a lot earlier than that. The problem is there are an infinite number of unaligned AI that would have different punishment schemes - making the threat of any given one worth devoting 0 resources to in practice. Including argument/mental consideration time, for that matter.