41–50 of 243 posts
Kudos to LambdaConf for actually keeping on focus in the face of dissent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since you're apparently talking about how unreasonable LambdaConf's code of conduct is, "donglegate" seems totally irrelevant given that it didn't involve the consequences of violating any conference's code of conduct, much less this one. "Donglegate" involved person a being offended by what another person said whilst at a conference, and somebody else - not the conference organizer, or indeed anyone at the conferenc…
They were reported to staff, who escorted them to a private area to shame them for saying something that someone found offensive. You don't see that as having a chilling effect?
Donglegate isn't about conference staff having a quiet word with people in private. It's about one person getting fired for offending another, and that person eventually getting fired because of community lacklash.
If all that had happened was that somebody got offended, privately told a staff member, and then the person causing offence had been privately spoken to - which is what the PyCon code of conduct required - we would never have heard about it.
Now, the possibility that the offendee might shame me publicly and cause me to get fired might have a chilling effect. But that's nothing to do with codes of conduct. If anything, publicly shaming somebody that offends you would be in violation of the code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since you're apparently talking about how unreasonable LambdaConf's code of conduct is, "donglegate" seems totally irrelevant given that it didn't involve the consequences of violating any conference's code of conduct, much less this one. "Donglegate" involved person a being offended by what another person said whilst at a conference, and somebody else - not the conference organizer, or indeed anyone at the conferenc…
They were reported to staff, who escorted them to a private area to shame them for saying something that someone found offensive. You don't see that as having a chilling effect?
You, like many others, miss the most important part of DongleGate. She shamed the supposed dongle-joke offender on Twitter with their picture, which was unambiguously against the Code of Conduct, for it bans harassing photography. She did not only fail to see the hypocrisy, her actions were deemed heroic and she compared herself to Joan of Arc.
This was a clear sign to anyone paying attention that Codes of Conduct were never about policing behavior objectively, but instead were to be wielded as a weapon to shame and attack particular groups of people based on a political ideology of victimhood.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They were reported to staff, who escorted them to a private area to shame them for saying something that someone found offensive. You don't see that as having a chilling effect?
You're moving the goalposts. Donglegate isn't about conference staff having a quiet word with people in private. It's about one person getting fired for offending another, and that person eventually getting fired because of community lacklash. If all that had happened was that somebody got offended, privately told a staff member, and then the person causing offence had been privately spoken to - which is what the PyC…
Your assertion was "You will need to remain silent if you bully, harrass, intimidate, stalk, stereotype, or belittle." The guys in donglegate did none of those things, and yet they were in fact reported to staff. Over private words.
My point is that you never know what is going to offend someone. This CoC says that you agree to be removed from the premises if someone gets offended, provided they are of proper minority status, which in itself invalidates the whole idea that this is a non-political CoC.
I would think it would be well within the mandate of the conference organisers to pick talks that reflect the material they want to see presented and the conversation they want attendees to be able to participate in. The conference is a curated collection of talks, and will necessarily reflect an active political position held by the organising committee and a passive political position shaped by systemic issues. For almost all tech conferences, even the very large ones, the politics expressed are so bland and so unfocused that no one really cares about them. Almost no tech conference has the capability to seriously address systemic issues of inclusivity.
I imagine LambdaConf's view resonantes with the audience on HackerNews, because it addresses primarily the former politics. The latter politics aren't a danger to most of the commentators here.
The inclusivity of attendance seems to be much more defensible. Even under great pressure, I can see an event being reluctant to bar attendance. I don't know that any tech conferences ask unpopular people to simply stay away (even if they promise to be on best behaviour.)
The status quo: highly funded white people in a ranch house, obsessive dreams of white supremacy floating into the night...
(Unfortunately in the real world, very few "technologists" have any sort of progressive future vision. Most just chase money and perks, building bureaucratic tech. Politically regressive.)
> we wrote the speaker and asked for a public statement clearly stating the speaker’s views on violence.
What does "violence" mean here? We're talking about Moldbug's acts of spreading white supremacy whenever he gets a platform. Including tech conferences and good ol' boy networking.
> Social media has muddled this issue so much
"Social media"... as in this blogpost? Twitter & HN? Techies sound suspiciously like oppressive governments, blaming "social media" when it threatens actual disruptive change.
> Last year, StrangeLoop rescinded an invitation to a speaker because of the controversy that erupted (nay, exploded) when his talk was announced.
People pointed out the error, and StrangeLoop promptly fixed it. This is in keeping with previous actions, like implementing dozens of tips from a highly respected diversity consultant.
There's a reason StrangeLoop is considered way ahead of the curve. Other confs aren't willing to do what it takes to be excellent. (And anyway, StrangeLoop is more than just about a single style of programming, unlike LambdaConf.)
> Would this be the end of LambdaConf???
How many tech conferences ended so far because they give high-profile white supremacists a platform? Just look at the racially-skewed audiences.
> Feedback Highlights: Below are a few quotes from some of the amazing feedback we received:
7 in favor of giving Moldbug a platform. 1 unclear. That's all he decided to list.
You'd think that someone could just come out and say exactly which of his views are so terrible, instead of pointing at his entire multiple-book-length blog and "wow just wow"ing.
That's wrong of course and I say that as a non republican. The Tech industry has become so politicized positions that used to be seen as extreme are considered "normal". I mean how can an article such as this one can be deemed acceptable on a tech blog ? : https://archive.is/elvvc
Replace white people by black people and racism, defined as broad generalizations based on the color of skin, becomes obvious. Yes the article linked is racist period.
As long as Curtis stays professional and speaks only on Urbit [0] he is doing the right thing and should be allowed to speak.