[philwelch]

It's fine if you don't respond--the strange thing about ideologies is that any two followers of them are largely interchangeable due to the lack of original thought involved.

Given recent events though, I'm surprised you're still going around setting yourself up as some type of moral authority. Someone who bullies women programmers doesn't really have much credibility on this issue, does he?

[qohen]

> Someone who bullies women programmers

Whoa...slow down there, hoss.

Steve explained that his tweet about @harthur's replace utility was not meant to disparage its author, or its code, but was meant to express his feelings about Node (i.e. the ecosystem for which replace was written). And, he apologized, "unequivocably", for the fact that his tweet had caused pain to @harthur:

http://blog.steveklabnik.com/posts/2013-01-23-node

And, @harthur then said this in a followup to her original post,

http://harthur.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/open-source-rocks-fo...

My last blog post was quite a downer, so I want to do a short follow up for posterity.

First of all, there were some nice responses to it from Steve Klabnik and especially Corey Haines, who gave a very sincere straight-up apology. Several people have told me they are usually very nice, so keep that in mind.

So, your characterization appears to be incorrect and unfair.

[qohen]

(In fact, the only thing Steve perhaps can be criticized for, in my view, is for using the word,

"unequivocably" -- which is non-standard -- instead of, "unequivocally",

when writing his apology. :-)

http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/69930/unequivocab... )

[steveklabnik]

Thanks. I just can't type. Fixing.

(I didn't even know that people said 'unequivocably.')

[philwelch]

Intentions don't matter. I'm glad harthur was magnanimous enough to accept the apology, but that doesn't really change much.