
“There will be no Typelevel event @Lambda_Conf if [Yarvin's] invitation stands” - striking
https://twitter.com/typelevel/status/713042825802178560
======
brighteyes
There is obviously no unanimous opinion on how bad he is, _even if_ most
people agree it is some shade of "bad". And therefore if we start banning on
non-unanimous cases like this, we run a terrible risk.

For example, people that support abortions and people that eat meat are both
considered (by different people) to be supporting murder by significant parts
of the population. Not figurative murder, literal murder. They feel strongly
about that. But we shouldn't let them ban people, or we'll have "A functional
programming conference for liberals", "for conservatives", "for vegans", etc.
Is that what we want?

And that's just the practical risk of fracturing our communities. The moral
risk is that even if we did have unanimous consensus to ban him over personal
political views, we are in dangerous territory. The majority has been wrong
many times in the past. Tolerating a minority, even if its views (not actions)
seem offensive to us, is generally the right thing to do.

------
GFK_of_xmaspast
Good for them.

------
dudul
Typelevel does a great job at destroying the scala community.

------
13thLetter
A disappointing lack of professionalism on Typelevel's part, but fortunately
such behavior is also self-limiting.

