Not quite how the question went, but close.

The question "Is there a point where you will say 'I do more harm than good because people don't listen to me any more' and step aside?"

is a different question from

"If you're doing more harm than good will you step aside?"

But watch how he's a psycho either way:

The first question CAN be answered no if you still truly believe you're NOT doing more harm than good, or if you're doing more harm than good for a different reason than people not listening to you.

Now he's a psychopath, either for truly believing that slaughtering potentially millions is "doing more good than harm"; or for knowing he's mass murdering but LYING about truly believing he's "doing more good than harm"; or for knowing he's doing more harm than good for some reason other than people not listening to him, and using that linguistic trick to answer the question in the negative. Psycho.

The second question can't be answered no: because it stipulates that you're doing more harm than good AND that you're accepting this stipulation; and then you're still saying no, you won't step aside.

THAT is psychopathic on the face of it.

He's literally the flesh-and-blood stereotype of a megalomaniacal mad scientist: a mass-murdering psychopath costumed in a white coat, LARPing as a doctor who cares about human life.

Not quite how the question went, but close.

The question "Is there a point where you will say 'I do more harm than good because people don't listen to me any more' and step aside?"

is a different question from

"If you're doing more harm than good will you step aside?"

But watch how he's a psycho either way:

The first question CAN be answered no if you still truly believe you're NOT doing more harm than good, or if you're doing more harm than good for a different reason than people not listening to you. Now he's a psychopath either for knowing he's mass murdering but LYING about truly believing he's doing more good than harm; or for knowing he's doing more harm than good for another reason than people not listening to him, and using that linguistic trick to answer the question in the negative.

The second question can't be answered no: because it stipulates that you're doing more harm than good AND that you're accepting this stipulation; and then you're still saying no, you won't step aside. THAT is psychopathic on the face of it.

He's literally the flesh-and-blood stereotype of a megalomaniacal mad scientist: a mass-murdering psychopath costumed in a white coat, LARPing as a doctor who cares about human life.