If you organize events for people, you should be able to exclude people who try really hard to destroy the things you care about including that specific event.
Maybe I cannot justify this on some libertarian philosophical whatever principles, but from the psychological perspective it seems clear—the predictable outcome of having to interact with such people is burning out.
you should be able to exclude people who try really hard to destroy the things you care about including that specific event.
What? Who said anything about trying really hard to destroy things? (Are you claiming that criticizing a thing amounts to “try[ing] really hard to destroy” it?)
the predictable outcome of having to interact with such people is burning out.
Sure, but you could accomplish that by saying “Don’t contact me again”, not “You are banned from everything I can ban you from.” (If they ignore the no-contact request, then you can ban them for that.) The language reveals the motivations: “Don’t contact me” is about protecting my inbox; “You are banned from everything I can ban you from” is about punishment.
Letting someone buy a ticket for a 700-person event that you’re co-organizing doesn’t entail interacting with them, because you’re not going to personally interact with most people at a 700-person event anyway (and if they need to talk to staff, they can talk to one of your co-organizers instead of you). There were a couple people at Less Online who I’m not on the friendliest of terms with, so I didn’t talk to them (even though I saw them in the same room as me several times), and that was fine. I didn’t need the power to exclude my enemies from mere physical proximity with me in order to enjoy the event (and I hope my enemies are civilized enough to feel the same way about me).
If you organize events for people, you should be able to exclude people who try really hard to destroy the things you care about including that specific event.
Maybe I cannot justify this on some libertarian philosophical whatever principles, but from the psychological perspective it seems clear—the predictable outcome of having to interact with such people is burning out.
What? Who said anything about trying really hard to destroy things? (Are you claiming that criticizing a thing amounts to “try[ing] really hard to destroy” it?)
Sure, but you could accomplish that by saying “Don’t contact me again”, not “You are banned from everything I can ban you from.” (If they ignore the no-contact request, then you can ban them for that.) The language reveals the motivations: “Don’t contact me” is about protecting my inbox; “You are banned from everything I can ban you from” is about punishment.
Letting someone buy a ticket for a 700-person event that you’re co-organizing doesn’t entail interacting with them, because you’re not going to personally interact with most people at a 700-person event anyway (and if they need to talk to staff, they can talk to one of your co-organizers instead of you). There were a couple people at Less Online who I’m not on the friendliest of terms with, so I didn’t talk to them (even though I saw them in the same room as me several times), and that was fine. I didn’t need the power to exclude my enemies from mere physical proximity with me in order to enjoy the event (and I hope my enemies are civilized enough to feel the same way about me).