4 ms·

The only link I could find was from Cher Scarlett[1] who got banned from Lunduke's Patreon comments and got mined for gold here on HN in a different comment. S

The only link I could find was from Cher Scarlett[1] who got banned from Lunduke's Patreon comments and got mined for gold here on HN in a different comment. So Charles Wood was defending John with a liberal pro-speech "see where he's coming from" attitude. From what little I've seen, John seems like an outright inflammatory troll against cancel culture and SJWs. It's clear then that Charles is against cancel culture and SJWs, and he is willing to be in a foxhole with someone like John. He does not make a good case for his position for failing to understand what that cancel crowd is taking offense to. This whole situation also segued all the way from someone mocking semantics HTML, which prompted a conversation about the toxicity in programming where an unrelated person commented in a very naive manner that made black people upset that their experiences seemed like they were being marginalized. (One of them brought up the anecdote of a Nigerian programmer who didn't complain about walking 5 miles for water to the point where his fingers were too numb for typing.) This whole phenomenon is a clusterfk that's spiraled out of control between differing philosophical perspectives getting reciprocal fuel for their flame wars. It seems like cable news tier of conversations where people ultimately argue around the core issue of a broken society and economic system that disregards social justice and fairness for profit. As a side note, I'm not a fan of Lunduke either. I appreciated his Why Linux Sucks talks, but I quickly unsubscribed from his channel when he drags me into these culture war stuff I don't want to get dragged into when I want to learn about Linux. [1] https://medium.com/@cherp/propaganda-other-lies-we-tell-4325240379f7 https://medium.com/@cherp/propaganda-other-lies-we-tell-4325...

P_I_Staker 7y ago
> and he is willing to be in a foxhole with someone like John I resent this attitude, which has become too popular these days. I can defend someone without "being in a foxhole with them", if I think they're being treated too harshly, being misunderstood, ect (and it's not necessarily the "hill I want to die on either"). I might not even like the person, or agree with them. In fairness to you, in this case he does seem to be going out of his way to ally with him. I find myself skeptical of everyone in cases like these. The linked article has some serious issues in my opinion. Cher makes some good points, but is clearly very biased. That's understandable, however, some of the language she uses is warped to the point of being deceptive. I still feel like I'm not getting the full story here, and getting the full story requires wading through hours of social media drama. I certainly don't trust Lunduke either as there's also issues with his narrative. I still haven't seen anything that should be a violation of policy worthy of being disinvited. It still seems very much like politically motivated punishment and optics. Inviting someone to engage in a "civil conversation" as Wood did is pretty weasly, but I don't see any harrasment or abuse here.

P_I_Staker 7y ago

> and he is willing to be in a foxhole with someone like John I resent this attitude, which has become too popular these days. I can defend someone without "being in a foxhole with them", if I think they're being treated too harshly, being misunderstood, ect (and it's not necessarily the "hill I want to die on either"). I might not even like the person, or agree with them. In fairness to you, in this case he does seem to be going out of his way to ally with him. I find myself skeptical of everyone in cases like these. The linked article has some serious issues in my opinion. Cher makes some good points, but is clearly very biased. That's understandable, however, some of the language she uses is warped to the point of being deceptive. I still feel like I'm not getting the full story here, and getting the full story requires wading through hours of social media drama. I certainly don't trust Lunduke either as there's also issues with his narrative. I still haven't seen anything that should be a violation of policy worthy of being disinvited. It still seems very much like politically motivated punishment and optics. Inviting someone to engage in a "civil conversation" as Wood did is pretty weasly, but I don't see any harrasment or abuse here.