> I think it's easy to look past someone's personal preferences and outrageous comments when you're already part of the club. But respect that that isn't everyone's experience.
What specifically did Crockford say that was outrageous?
"I removed comments from JSON because I saw people were using them to hold parsing directives, a practice which would have destroyed interoperability. I know that the lack of comments makes some people sad, but it shouldn't.
Suppose you are using JSON to keep configuration files, which you would like to annotate. Go ahead and insert all the comments you like. Then pipe it through JSMin before handing it to your JSON parser."
Clearly these other people are in the club and Crockford is most definitely not. If this other person can get Crockford removed from the conference on a whim with no explanation the power and abuse of it is in the hands of the other person.
and it's rather "put-up or shut-up" time, I'd say.
I've never heard of this conference. I've read Crockfords books, and while any given person on earth may be a total bear to deal with, I'm not buying this greasy smarmy "he'd been uninvited for undisclosed reasons but we'll imply lot's of socially-disapproved-of reasons without confirming nor denying any of them"
what a kafka-esque load of nonsense.
the conference organizers are in the wrong and are doing further damage with every greasy fart they let out by way of explanation.
The problem is that they stopped being private grievances when they were used to remove a speaker from a public conference.
Way back in the good ol' days, this was exactly the sort of thing used to oppress the minorities: an unknown group of well-connected men would get together to black-ball someone for being the wrong sort of person, with no explanation, recourse, or accountability.
Like I have said before: choose your enemies carefully; you become them. The faces may have changed, but the behavior hasn't.
Yes but if you are going to give half-assed reasons for uninviting him, then you are going to have to defend yourself. If they had said: " Unfortunately Douglas Crackford will not attend the conference for unforeseen circumstances", we would not be in this outrage. If you are going to publicly shame someone and possible harm their career, you better have proof that he has done some very horrible things or comments. Listing a possible twitter message calling someone stupid does not sound like a reasonable cause too me. That is why we are voicing our concerns, and why hardly anyone here is agreeing with you.
What specifically did Crockford say that was outrageous?