Snuggs

@dstphantom welcome to the club. ;-)

@ljharb well done! I'm subscribed and have my eyes peeled. Seems like as I predicted last year there will be more eyeballs looking in the `require.extensions` direction. This is a...

@ljharb sounds like a plan! Any ref we can use to stick in the description / comment to watchdog? Seems like you know better than me. I've merely been judging...

@ljharb I knew this already. Not arguing file extensions. Arguing the community using the extension to mock the (dead) king of pop. Like I said...as an African American this is...

@ljharb did anyone ask MJ about this? I'm not "looking for upset". We definitely have better things to do with our day. You may but I don't get paid for...

@ljharb there are laws set up against usage of name and likeliness of celebrities here in America. We can do it. [Still doesn't make it right. And also a very...

@ljharb your opinion. And you are free to have this. I mentioned this to you already. But opinions aren't always facts and this conversation has been going on for a...

> Not supporting a mutable require.extensions is not what is causing all of the issues that users are experiencing. The issue is that the default value for this module's extensions...

Yes I don't think @ljharb realizes [how serious this is](https://github.com/substack/tape/issues/395#issuecomment-373257101) For people using both tools. For instance is BLOOMBERG right for using `application/ecmascript` in some libraries? That's debatable. As long...

A breaking change to do what this library actually says the name says it does is a worthy change in my book. At least have the readme say otherwise as...