Too bad the linked article arguments are of poor quality and unconvincing. There was a bug on MacOS that ended-up requiring XCode to be install in order for th

Too bad the linked article arguments are of poor quality and unconvincing. There was a bug on MacOS that ended-up requiring XCode to be install in order for the Go compiler to work? That example is bad because: 1. it was going to be very obvious real quick 2. it did get discovered and fixed without telemetry. ... and both of my points above are irrelevant. Why? Because the problem raised here is not if telemetry is useful or not. It's not even if telemetry is good or bad. It's that discussions about telemetry silenced people who were against it. Your point is that people should not be allowed to raise arguments that have not been approved as valid. I mean, the simplest reformulation is that "if we think you're wrong you will not be allowed to speak." For real? Being wrong means you're not allowed to participate? (And by wrong, I mean "deemed wrong by the people in power to ban others.")