> but I still think it is not that dramatic of a thing, especially without hearing the reasoning of the organizers. You still seem to be missing the point: Whi

> but I still think it is not that dramatic of a thing, especially without hearing the reasoning of the organizers. You still seem to be missing the point: Which “organizers”? The ostensible “Leadership” of the project – which one would think should be the final arbiters of any such organizing – did want the guy to do the keynote. The real issue here is that the stewardship of the whole project, to put it in sophisticated technical terms, sucks if some grey eminence can undermine the official leadership just like that. Then their whole code-of-conduct, leadership-by-committee, woke-and-adapted-for-Modern-Audiences governance foofarah is just flim-flam, a sham, a lie. That's the real issue here.