Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rust Moderation Team Resigns

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 912 posts

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#91

Post by LanceH »

nvrspyx wrote: post #57
sharklazer wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Guessing they were self-elected. The fact that they won’t disclose what the issue is or the nature of the issue, it’s likely they were being little whiney kids. To me, it looks like moderators somehow want to usurp power that the ACTUAL devs should have.

You realize that the moderation team were all rust contributors/developers, right?

And without any details at all, it sounds like some people want to bend others to a code of conduct that they never agreed to.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#92

Post by q1w2 »

Is there any tech consequence to this immature drama?

I'm confused as to whether I should care or not. If there are consequences on the tech, people need to spell that out.

Right now this all seems like some middle-school playground emotional drama. I'm too old to care about that.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#93

Post by dthul »

fijiaarone wrote: post #70
fijiaarone wrote: post #50

We don't contribute but we want control -- if we can't have it, we will libel the project. Almost every open source project is being overtaken by social justice warrior leeches. Even Linus Torvalds was kicked out of Linux. I'm surprised that the Rust community pushed back.

4 Downvotes in 1 minute -- exhibit A

The author of the PR is burntsushi of ripgrep fame. This isn't some "developer oppression by non-developers".

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#95

Post by couchand »

throwawaygh wrote: post #47
simion314 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe is better that no single action is emphasized or a single person and focus on the actual problem, the fact that there might be a group that is above the laws/rules and possible solutions. Edit: I think if some action will be made public then everyone will focus on debating why that action was correct/incorrect , then a lot of mostly politics dirt will be thrown around etc.

I'm generally in favor of enforcing high-level "behave professionally" norms in OSS communities. And not as a new phenomenon, either. I've been kick-banning disruptive people from IRC channels for several decades, I've run forums where I appointed mods, and I've always avoided participating in completely unmoderated communities beyond N=20 or so (not worth the headache). But for some reason, the formalization of cond…

How exactly are the groups of people working on various parts of the official ecosystem supposed to coordinate their efforts? The only alternative I've seen is a benevolent dictator, which seems significantly worse for a number of reasons.

Edit: it looks like you've removed the part about Teams/Committees.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#96

Post by simion314 »

throwawaygh wrote: post #47
simion314 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe is better that no single action is emphasized or a single person and focus on the actual problem, the fact that there might be a group that is above the laws/rules and possible solutions. Edit: I think if some action will be made public then everyone will focus on debating why that action was correct/incorrect , then a lot of mostly politics dirt will be thrown around etc.

I'm generally in favor of enforcing high-level "behave professionally" norms in OSS communities. And not as a new phenomenon, either. I've been kick-banning disruptive people from IRC channels for several decades, I've run forums where I appointed mods, and I've always avoided participating in completely unmoderated communities beyond N=20 or so (not worth the headache). But for some reason, the formalization of cond…

>But for some reason, the formalization of conduct enforcement stuff around OSS projects still feels weird, off-putting, and very "Corporate HR"-y to me.

But if a community already approved such rules is it OK that those would not apply equally for all? Before joining a new community I always check and see if there is a lot of toxicity or just low effort contributions and I am avoiding those, it would suck to join a community because they promise moderation and later you see that the rules don't apply equally.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#97

Post by phtrivier »

lovecg wrote: post #49

Why does a language need a “moderation team”? C++ seems to do fine without one.

In this case, this a moderation of the community of human beings developing the rust compiler and its eco-system.

This is a team of human beings, who are going to have human interactions - tensions are bound to arise, and rules / traditions / taboos will develop to handle / resolve / hide them.

The Rust community seems to be having debates about those rules - not being part of the community, and not knowing anything about the situation, I have to brush it up as "someone else drama."

I suppose you can compare it to either the human interaction in the team of human beings developing `clang` (no idea how this is organized, or wether it has public politics / drama) ; and the C++ ISO community (which I'm pretty sure has loooooots of drama, but keeps it corporate and private.)

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#98

Post by vegai_ »

woodruffw wrote: post #31
scandox wrote: post #16

> In this message, we have avoided airing specific grievances beyond unaccountability. We've chosen to maintain discretion and confidentiality. We recommend that the broader Rust community and the future Mod Team exercise extreme skepticism of any statements by the Core Team (or members thereof) claiming to illuminate the situation. Isn't that a kind of scorched earth statement? I read it as "we will be discreet and…

"Assume all your worst fears are true" is substantially different in meaning from "exercise skepticism around public statements by the Core Team." I understand your reading, but I don't think it's warranted by the actual public announcement here.

Exercise extreme skepticism. It doesn't seem like that word is there by accident.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#99

Post by mumblemumble »

capableweb wrote: post #39
simion314 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe is better that no single action is emphasized or a single person and focus on the actual problem, the fact that there might be a group that is above the laws/rules and possible solutions. Edit: I think if some action will be made public then everyone will focus on debating why that action was correct/incorrect , then a lot of mostly politics dirt will be thrown around etc.

> focus on the actual problem, the fact that there might be a group that is above the laws/rules and possible solutions I just find it hard to understand on how you are suppose to see if the group is above the rules or how you can find any possible solutions, when what is supposed to have exemplified the problem is kept in the dark.

> I just find it hard to understand on how you are suppose to see if the group is above the rules or how you can find any possible solutions

Perhaps you aren't?

This is still an internal Rust team issue; it's not a problem for us, a bunch of randos on the Internet, to solve. Our job is just to gawp from a distance, maybe gossip on Hacker News a bit.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#100

Post by jturpin »

codys wrote: post #18
nikivi wrote: post #3

I wonder if it's related to this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28513130

Alternately, there's this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28515306

I love Rust the language, and the community is generally good, but for whatever reason modern identity politics has always been looming around its key members. Maybe just because it spun out of Mozilla and the Brendan Eich debacle, who knows.
Post reply on HN