4 ms·

Apparently this guy was also not sufficiently deferential to some powerful person, so he is not an appropriate attendee for an event that is all about being gra

Apparently this guy was also not sufficiently deferential to some powerful person, so he is not an appropriate attendee for an event that is all about being grateful for their presence. You don't know what his relationship is. Maybe this donor thinks this person molested his daughter, but doesn't have enough proof to get a conviction. At the end of the day a donor has just as much right to pull or use any influence they have as this applicant has to attend a private conference. I've quite possibly never seen a more worthless piece of writing or topic. Although I'd have to go through the TC archives to be sure.

dkarl 16y ago
And we have every right to draw conclusions about TED based on how they react to such pressure. (On a meta note, rights are a pathetic red herring pulled out when people don't want to defend something on other grounds. Should we refrain from criticizing anything unless we want to ban it? Should we refrain from praising anything unless we want to make it compulsory? If you condemn all criticism as a slippery slope towards taking away people's rights, we don't have much left to talk about.)
- kenjackson 16y ago
  There's a reason why people tend to discount anonymous sources, especially when there is no additional content or evidence. In this case we have an anonymous source, giving one side of a story (this "reporter" doesn't even appear to attempt to validate this story with the "curator" or anyone else), and already comes from a publication that is generally known for sloppy work and biased reporting. IOW, you have every right to draw conclusions even on the basis of zero information -- and that would be slightly better than what you've done here.
  - dkarl 16y ago
    I acknowledged in my first post, which you replied to and therefore presumably read, that the story reported in the link may not be true. What's with the bitter tone?
    - kenjackson 16y ago
      The bitter tone? My apologies. It's just the writing from TC strikes a nerve in my at how bad and perverse it is. In any case I let that leak through in my response to you and others. Again, sorry about that.

dkarl 16y ago

And we have every right to draw conclusions about TED based on how they react to such pressure. (On a meta note, rights are a pathetic red herring pulled out when people don't want to defend something on other grounds. Should we refrain from criticizing anything unless we want to ban it? Should we refrain from praising anything unless we want to make it compulsory? If you condemn all criticism as a slippery slope towards taking away people's rights, we don't have much left to talk about.)

kenjackson 16y ago
There's a reason why people tend to discount anonymous sources, especially when there is no additional content or evidence. In this case we have an anonymous source, giving one side of a story (this "reporter" doesn't even appear to attempt to validate this story with the "curator" or anyone else), and already comes from a publication that is generally known for sloppy work and biased reporting. IOW, you have every right to draw conclusions even on the basis of zero information -- and that would be slightly better than what you've done here.
- dkarl 16y ago
  I acknowledged in my first post, which you replied to and therefore presumably read, that the story reported in the link may not be true. What's with the bitter tone?
  - kenjackson 16y ago
    The bitter tone? My apologies. It's just the writing from TC strikes a nerve in my at how bad and perverse it is. In any case I let that leak through in my response to you and others. Again, sorry about that.