05:13 <ELLIOTTCABLE> twee

05:13 <ELLIOTTCABLE> …tbot

05:14 <ELLIOTTCABLE> Okay ... what the fuck happened in here, today

05:14 <ELLIOTTCABLE> I'm on the road for another coming 24 hours

05:14 <ELLIOTTCABLE> and trying to sort through the chatlog every time I stop at a supercharger ain't fucking going fucking well, so somebody tl;dr me

05:28 <ljharb> essentially, someone started complaining about "SJWs" and "feelings on the internet", someone else agreed, and then while i was attempting to understand and counter their position, the former mentioned the moldbug thing (ie, defending moldbug) and that caused coraline to leave. we ended up talking about the difference between public and private spaces, and

05:28 <ljharb> then at some point things kind of died down.

05:30 <jfhbrook> wow, I missed that

05:30 <jfhbrook> sounds like a shitshow

05:45 <jfhbrook> fuck my life

05:45 <ljharb> twas a bit.

05:46 <ljharb> luckily nobody seemed to say anything super overtly offensive, but a very large number of offensive things were danced around and hinted at.

05:46 <jfhbrook> I mean, from my perspective, and maybe this is silly, but

05:46 <jfhbrook> I kinda want a safe space

05:46 <jfhbrook> and by safe space I mean the exact one they're whining about

05:47 <jfhbrook> and I don't aim to make every space I'm in one where I don't have to hear people talk about SJWs non-ironically

05:47 <jfhbrook> but there aren't very many

05:47 <jfhbrook> safe is the wrong word

05:47 <jfhbrook> as I rarely feel unsafe

05:48 <jfhbrook> non-annoying spaces

05:48 <jfhbrook> let's say that

05:48 <ljharb> comfortable spaces?

05:48 <jfhbrook> I can deal with my ideas being challenged

05:48 <jfhbrook> that's not what I mean

05:49 <jfhbrook> for instance, I just had a close friend tell me I'm overreacting to that horrible /r/javascript thread

05:49 <jfhbrook> and he's probably right

05:49 <jfhbrook> after all, nodevember folded like

05:50 <ljharb> i don't know which thread you mean

05:50 <jfhbrook> you know about the nodevember/crockford thing though?

05:50 <jfhbrook> it's the reddit thread about that

05:50 <ljharb> i know that they removed him. i don't know specifically why, but i assume it's because he's an asshole

05:50 <ljharb> fill me in?

05:51 <jfhbrook> https://www.reddit.com/r/javascript/comments/50u77r/douglas_crockford_removed_as_a_keynote_speaker_at/

05:51 <jfhbrook> well that's the thing ljharb

05:51 <jfhbrook> he's *just* an asshole

05:51 <jfhbrook> he's said the kind of mildly sexist stuff your parents might say

05:51 <jfhbrook> and one time he had a talk called "monads and gonads"

05:52 <ljharb> sure, i remember that

05:52 <ljharb> at the time i thought it was funny

05:52 <jfhbrook> yeah, like that was it

05:52 <ljharb> i was, shall we say, less evolved back then

05:52 <jfhbrook> emily started tweeting about how nodevember's lineup was all men and how they were inviting THIS guy and how their conference was at a religious school

05:52 <jfhbrook> kas was like, oh yeah THAT guy I won't be in the same room as him

05:52 <ljharb> the solution there tho is to a) get women, and b) pick a non-religious school

05:53 <jfhbrook> nodevember just started bending over backwards over twitter, like done he's out

05:53 <jfhbrook> they got a killer deal on the space ljharb I don't really blame them

05:53 <ljharb> (unrelated to what they do with crockford)

05:53 <ljharb> sure

05:53 <jfhbrook> and yeah, I think they're also taking steps to diversify the lineup? though I'm not sure?

05:54 <jfhbrook> idk, I saw it and then I was like wait what did crockford do? oh, funny

05:54 <jfhbrook> then they're like dun done and I'm like, oh I wasn't really going anyway and that's weird but okay

05:54 <jfhbrook> but then *this* thread

05:54 <ljharb> i mean, crock shouldn't have a platform regardless

05:54 <ljharb> but i also suspect if they'd diversified the lineup quickly, that the specific upset over crock would probably have faded

05:55 <jfhbrook> yeah I mean their behavior seemed pretty reactionary and I get that

05:55 <ljharb> but here's the main thing, regardless of the specifics of this situation:

05:55 <jfhbrook> but that thread just makes me angry

05:55 <jfhbrook> I hate people

05:56 <ljharb> if, when commenting on this situation, you also defend a) moldbug, b) opal, c) all the other total bullshit that is indefensible, you kind of prove the point.

05:56 <jfhbrook> who's opal?

05:56 <jfhbrook> I remember lambdaparty and moldbug, that was bad

05:56 <jfhbrook> moldbug is like the guy that wrote the book my really racist uncle reads and gets bad ideas from

05:57 <ljharb> opal was this thread https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941#issuecomment-113272419

05:57 <jfhbrook> oh

05:59 <jfhbrook> I remember that

05:59 <jfhbrook> I at least can follow the logic on that one, because you can treat a github repo in a sanitized way that you really can't a conference

05:59 <jfhbrook> I don't think it's right

05:59 <jfhbrook> at all

06:00 <jfhbrook> but in a world where a software project doesn't have values, just a version history and an ACL

06:01 <jfhbrook> or perhaps in a world where nobody is able to have an outside opinion about a project if they haven't put effort into it

06:02 <jfhbrook> oh wow, this is a project that people actually use

06:02 <jfhbrook> fucking morons

06:02 <ljharb> lol yeah, that too

06:02 <purr> lolnope

06:04 <jfhbrook> wow I just looked at the original keynote lineup

06:04 <jfhbrook> richard rodger gives a *lot* of talks

06:05 <jfhbrook> like a lot a lot of talks

06:05 <jfhbrook> because it's good business for nearform

07:36 <incomprehensibly> wow this stuff makes me slightly uneasy and makes me feel paralyzed

07:37 <incomprehensibly> i feel like it's impossible to express unease over like, immediately removing a speaker without a chance for dialogue, learning, forgiveness, whatever,

07:37 <incomprehensibly> without being perceived as throwing your support in with the "other camp"

07:37 <incomprehensibly> or whatever

07:38 <incomprehensibly> like i absolutely think that like, promiscuity/commitment metaphors are fairly ill advised in a conference talk? but i also feel like the community has only one way to deal with that which is

07:38 <incomprehensibly> this person has become Bad and Tainted

07:38 <incomprehensibly> get him out of here

07:38 <incomprehensibly> no more talks ever

07:41 <incomprehensibly> though also i've had experience irl with people who consistently make people feel unsafe and never learn and i do believe there are situations where someone should basically be permanently excluded and it's hard to get people to agree/help with that

07:45 <incomprehensibly> meh

08:07 <ljharb> incomprehensibly: i don't think that's true

08:07 <ljharb> you can dissent over this specific thing all you like

08:07 <ljharb> but if your dissent involves referencing other incidents/issues, then obviously that's what you've pulled in

08:08 <ljharb> also generally, it's not "no more talks ever", it's usually that the person digs their heels in instead of immediately apologizing and recognizing the mistake

17:58 <jfhbrook> idk I can see it

17:59 <jfhbrook> like in general I don't think they're coming to take your guns

17:59 <jfhbrook> but I feel like a conversation wasn't had regarding crockford

18:00 <jfhbrook> I woulda just swapped some of the speaker slots (richard rodger doesn't need yet another podium) and called it a day

18:01 <jfhbrook> maybe made a commitment to tell crockford to remember that, hey, women code now