> Perhaps you mean "no speech is totally banned". Because it sure as hell it IS banned from being part of the conference. That's the problem though, isn't it?

> Perhaps you mean "no speech is totally banned". Because it sure as hell it IS banned from being part of the conference. That's the problem though, isn't it? It's clear from Nodevember's statement[1] that the action was taken because some member of the community felt uncomfortable, and explicitly not because of any specific speech or action on the part of Mr. Crockford. If this were a movement to censor certain specific speech, I would likely be opposed to it on philosophical grounds but would support and empathize with the motivation. That's not what this movement is about. I see this as an example of a movement based on an extreme political ideology usurping power within a community by shaming its members into submission. [1] http://nodevember.org/statement.html http://nodevember.org/statement.html