[geldan]

I don't think it's reasonable that the organizer not be held accountable. From this article:

> By the time I’d received notice of the event unfolding on the evening of 2016-09-01, the decision was already made by the main organzier, swiftly and without discussion.

> And in a moment of confusion, a poor decision was made to remove Douglas Crockford as a speaker, by the main organizer.

Just because the organizer was put in a tough position doesn't mean they shouldn't be held accountable for making the wrong decision.

[NhanH]

You can held them accountable the same way you held your junior developer accountable: it was a mistake, and they definitely could have done a lot better. Any blame wouldn't be unjustified. But what's the point and to what end?

Edit: the point is that it's missing the root cause. People could always be better, smarter, doing the right thing, be omniscience. But most of us are not. Between a rock and a hard place... there is no good choice. For all they know, all of their other 47 speakers are not speaking in the alternative case.

[kensign]

The good choice is not to make a hasty decision without the backing of the rest of the organizers. This is not a mistake, it is a very intentional move to exclude the rest of the org.

[stuartaxelowen]

Main organizer != Junior developer

[h_r]

Does the main organizer now acknowledge this was a mistake? Sincere question since I have no idea.