I think this is fine. The goal is to help people decide what talks to see. I think we should strive to not take things personally
-
-
-
the goal is great, the idea is innovative, and the whole thing is well-meant. Words matter to me and IMO this one was poorly chosen.
-
but it's clear that not everyone agrees with me on that, which is fine.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
everything about that rubric screams "in-group only" to me. Such a hyper-specific, minutiae-oriented list.
-
can you think of ways to better slot talks or should advanced talks just start from the beginning?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"Oddly tone-deaf and off-putting" is their brand.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I mean it's the FP conf
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@lambda_conf I've tried, but I don't get your objection to a word with definition: having requisite or adequate abilitiesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.