Now you seem to start with lecturing, by claiming that what I do is lacking a basic integrity. Quite a bold claim, considering the fact that you don't know my m

Now you seem to start with lecturing, by claiming that what I do is lacking a basic integrity. Quite a bold claim, considering the fact that you don't know my motivation, you didn't hear it yet. But this raises a question, do you approve lecturing in the comments, or you don't, or you do but only when you do it...? It's confusing. I repeat, the general tone of the article is bitter - it says a lot about negativity in the community and lack of consious direction of the conference itself. Majority of the article is about that. This is justifying what I said about article. Then, at the end there is some cheering up words, like, he liked we has there, which is again the typical and healthy behaviour - no one wants to have a conclusion that did something which maybe was a big waste of time and money and it probably wasn't. But still, there are many concerns, not technical but social, in the article as a whole. And you know, the word "bitter" pretty much fits the situation when somebody describes social affairs of some group with dissapointment - in this case, it not only about the conference but about the society around the Rust language in general. So I am guessing now, what kind of title would be satisfactory for you, saying "overall a bitter comments on a conf and Rust society but with a cheerful conclusion"? That's kind of waste of characters typed, and honestly, seems to suggest lack of intelligence of the reader. Honestly I wasn't thinking about all the guidelines for posting; read them years ago and wasn't even remotely suspecting I'd break them now. Re-read them when this discussion started, and as long as I see I have broken one of the points, I still disagree with that. It's putting too much attention into the petty details. People are more mature and less sensitive that you think, and can have their own opinion even if the headline is less neutral than some policy-watchers think. So, if you think that you will convince me to edit or delete my submission, I'd say no. You can ofc invoke "higher powers", I don't care. Precisely for the fact I described above - it's too much regulation around a simple thing.