Crockford

You're asking these activists to practice mercy. That's a big ask for someone who is learning what power feels like.

You appear to have made a mistake in whose quotes you've tweeted: that first one isn't from @nexxylove.

> He said a few things that feel like promoting a non inclusive environment.

source ? because I was unable to find anything that promotes "a non inclusive environment" in what Mr CrockFord said. Can you tell us exactly what CrockFord said that feels "non inclusive". Can you also precisely define what you mean by "non inclusive".

> It disappoints me to see how many folks on Hacker News have responded to this incident by condemning the entire concept of standards of conduct and the idea that the developer community should take the goal of inclusivity and sensitivity seriously.

Who. Who has responded that way?

Have you read the article?

There is:

- no official message on exactly why he was shit-canned.

- references in his previous talks to:

   - "gonads" (literally, a reproductive organ, i.e. testicles or ovaries);

   - "huevos" (eggs, in Spanish);

   - something "standing out like dogs balls"; and 

   - commenting that drunk people were giving stupid talks at a conference.

If you claim that referring to having gonads is "exclusionary", because some people may have neither, then fuck it, you can't ever present anything that references the concept of seeing or hearing, because thats exclusionary to people with vision/hearing issues.

I know some people don't like eating eggs, but its hardly reason to complain about a presenter at a conference.

Dogs balls do stand out. Have you seen a male dog that hasn't been de-sexed? Who is attending these conferences, 5 year olds? If someone is so offended by a reference to dogs testicles being very obvious, how on earth did they even make it to the conference? Most modern tv advertising is more explicit than that.

I can't even begin to comprehend how the last one is offensive. Oh wait. I know. We have to be inclusive. So presenters should be allowed (nay, ENCOURAGED!) to present drunk.

> Instead, let's engage in a constructive dialogue to figure out how to do better.

Given that no one that actually made the complaint seems willing to publicly identify specifically what they believe Crockford did wrong, how would you imagine that is even possible?

Oh wait, let me guess.

Complainant: " is non-inclusive, let's un-invite/ban him"

Moderator: "Well, hang on now, what exactly did he say or do?"

Complainant: "The moderator is being non-inclusive, let's ban him!"

Sponsor-Suckling-Controversy-Allergic-Organisers: "ok, we've banned all presenters except you and your hand-picked list of friends. we've also gone ahead and implemented the attendee filter you requested, and anyone who questions this process will of course be denied entry"

I'm all for women in tech, I'm all for equality and people not being attacked for who they are. I'm not for people using ridiculous mis-representation of a person to have that person removed from an event.

In cases like these, it's worth thinking a bit about tolerance. Tolerance, simply put, is behaving politely and professionally towards people and organizations that you dislike. Note the "that you dislike" part.

Think you're tolerant because, say, you don't mind being around gay people? Well, do you hate gay people? If you say no to that, then you aren't being tolerant at all by being around them, you're just normal.

Do you hate, say, Neo-nazis? Then you can demonstrate your tolerance by engaging with them politely and professionally if you encounter any.

Apparently, at some point, we not only ran away from being proud of our tolerance, many people are wearing their level of intolerance as a badge of pride. In some circles, it seems to be a good thing to find anybody who disagrees with you in some way, and gather a virtual lynch mob to make sure that the worst thing you can arrange happens to them.

Personally, I don't think Crockford did anything wrong. But if you do, why don't you try demonstrating your tolerance by welcoming him at your conference anyways and listening to his views on technical subjects? If he says something that bothers you, you can calmly and politely explain to him how his statement hurt you, or maybe even just let it go. That's what tolerance looks like.

Can we please get back to making real tolerance something to be proud of?