Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?
1–10 of 52 posts
Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?
#2My God.
An adult.
Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?
#3CONTEXT: Linked post is from Feb 29, 2016. Before the recent tumult about LamdaConf announcing their intention to host a speaker who is also a "fascist", and "slavery apologist." (Post explaining their logic there is: http://degoes.net/articles/lambdaconf-inclusion .)
Not sure why it's being posted now.
Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?
#4Speaking as a conservative Christian, that's a pretty tame pledge of conduct. The only thing that bothers me about it is that it demands that you go straight to a staff member if you see a violation, rather than try to resolve it peacefully. I certainly wouldn't feel like I was going to be asked to compromise my beliefs. Maybe the one who asked the question was extrapolating or asking based on other sources?
Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?
#5Do tech conferences honestly need codes of conduct?
Feels a bit like living in a home - some folks hate the idea of Home Owner Associations with their explicit rules, others can't imagine living next to people without everything spelled out.
Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?
#6Why not just reject a speaker if you think it will hurt ticket sales? You don't have a duty to stand up for free speech, or whatever. You host a conference, you protect your brand, and if people don't like it they can start their own.
Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?
#7I wonder if the original email was more about this point in the "Pledge":
> That I shall not talk or act in ways that could make minority groups feel bullied, harassed, intimidated, stalked, stereotyped, or belittled; examples of minority groups include women, people of color, lesbians, gays, and people who are disabled, bisexual, transsexual, asexual, intersex, transgender, and gender-variant;
It specifically talks about "minority groups". Presumably, the person who emailed John felt himself part of the "majority", or at least not covered in the "minority" groups.
I wonder why the pledge explicitly talks about minority groups? Why not just say that there should be no bullying, harassment, etc. period.
FWIW, I am a "person of color" (I do dislike using that phrase).
Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?
#8He seems like a nice, reasonable guy. I actually think that he's more tolerant than most people, and that the radical left could learn something from him.
Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?
#9I applaud LambdaConf's decision, compared to Strange Loop which caved to bullying.
Neoreaction is not a powerful movement. Attacking neoreaction is not punching up.
Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?
#10I believe that “good” can only, ever mean, “I like it,” and bad can only, ever mean, “I don’t like it.” Morality, in my view, is just how we try to objectify what are inherently subjective personal preferences.
This is... a ridiculously oversimplified caricature of atheistic philosophy, presumably now posted (as the original post predates the current controversy[0]) to imply the obviously incorrect syllogism that if we accept people who are privately religious we're somehow obligated to not only accept outspoken racists, but put them on a stage.
[0] The idea that it should be controversial to deny a platform to someone who's chosen to become a public figure by promoting racist violence is absurd, regardless of any technical accomplishments (which would be a pretty strong characterization of the pointless Turing trap that is urbit). I've already canceled my flight for LambdaConf and in the future I will happily decline to work with people who failed to do so.