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

471–480 of 912 posts

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#471

Post by cycomanic »

rocqua wrote: post #149
foldr wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not seeing any connection between the linked discussions and identity politics, and I'm certainly not seeing any connection with Brendan Eich. Hopefully not every thread that involves reference to a CoC has to automatically turn in to a grievance bin for people who have a bone to pick with identity politics.

The second link in this thread ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28515306 ) includes multiple alleged statements that are about identity politics. One example being: "saying incredibly horrible sexist and racist things such as 'kill all men', and actively trying to prevent white men from speaking at tech conferences" Which seems to be connected to identity politics.

I encourage everyone to read the actual links in that post. I'm in no way associated with any party, but the links that supposedly give evidence for specific statements are not as clear cut as it's made out to be.

E.g. with respect to the wasm-pack both sides have reasonable arguments in the thread how I read it.

With respect to unsubstantiated accusation, that very post makes accusations of nepotism without any proof.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#472

Post by DarkCrusader2 »

From the rust subreddit, which apparently is an "unofficial space" does not want people to discuss any specifics either. Why is this discourse happening in public? They want to use public opinion to bring reforms to the Rust governance but not divulge any details?

Does Rust really have a community if noone but a few select member have access to the information regarding why things are changing and the community members can't even discuss the forbidden topics in "unofficial spaces" either. How do I decide if I an getting involved with a community or just an elite club.

Quoting from the stickied comment from r/rust moderator.

> In the interest of not hastily jumping to conclusions, we will be removing speculation that alleges that this is due to any particular individual(s). The moderation team appears to have gone to great lengths to avoid naming names, ostensibly in the service of focusing a spotlight on the core team as a whole rather than any of its members. If they had wanted to name names, they could have. I understand that it is difficult to discuss a topic without firm details, but please refrain from engaging in speculation. I have confirmation that the core team will be making a statement about this at some point, which will hopefully shed more light on the situation.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#473

Post by wyager »

ben-schaaf wrote: post #330
nopcode wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and this is the policy of many long-running and successful FOSS projects (e.g. kernel developers). Rust however wanted something different and attracted a lot of "snowflakes" because of it.

The Kernel also has a code of conduct: https://www.kernel.org/code-of-conduct.html .

This was added within the last 3 or so years as the result of an intentional social struggle to put a CoC on the kernel. It remains to be seen what the net effect of this on kernel development will be.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#474

Post by dathinab »

capableweb wrote: post #27
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…

I read it as they warn people to believe the core team specifically, not the whole Rust organization, as the reason they are leaving is because of the actions from individuals in the core team (or lack of thereof).

> warn [..] to believe the core team

It's not even this, it's only "believe the core Team wrt. this specific situation" as well as a implicit "we do not believe the core Team is suited for making decisions about the personnel of the new Moderation Team Members".

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#475

Post by pg_1234 »

iamed2 wrote: post #84

There are two statements here regarding things that have happened: > the Core Team placing themselves unaccountable to anyone but themselves > we have been unable to enforce the Rust Code of Conduct to the standards the community expects of us and to the standards we hold ourselves to It's possible that there were CoC violations that they were not able to moderate, that the actions available to them were limited (e.g…

Sounds like the people trying to play social politics had a hissy fit because they couldn't control the people doing the actual work.

Fantastic.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#476

Post by isitdopamine »

Since they don't say what happened, I can only speculate.

The usual CoC violation: probably someone in the Core Team made a statement (outside the Rust community and not speaking officially) that does not align with the progressive political thinking.

You say that the larger number of men in tech with respect to women might be due to biological reasons? CoC violation, fire the enemy of the people!

You say you voted for Trump? CoC violation, fire the enemy of the people!

You say only biological women are actual women? CoC violation, fire the enemy of the people!

When there was a huge push to adopt CoCs I warned everyone I knew about the clear potential for abuse by the leftist (who also incidentally happen to be the ones to back CoCs). In particular a CoC should cover only actions performed in a community, no-one should be banned to contributing to a project because of what they write on Twitter, for instance!

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#477

Post by jacquesm »

ncmncm wrote: post #459
jacquesm wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but when you resign you are no longer in a position to influence anything. Resignation is an act of last resort, you throw yourself on your sword in the hope that someone notices and that's that. You can do it exactly once.

Until they join something else. Resigning is a principled stand, and principles are respected in some places.

Until this has been completely cleared up I highly doubt these moderators will be welcome anywhere else. For now they are almost (but not quite) as tainted as the core team because there is of course a chance that the core team is right and they are wrong.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#478

Post by bb010g »

papreclip wrote: post #435

>"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." I guess these are the juicy details they are choosing to omit - https://archive.fo/f…

That is an extremely GamerGate-smelling list. Quotes are misinterpreted, overreacted to, and/or taken out of context.

That list does not contain juicy details; it does contain a level of grime that I figured would mean it would be left in the past as a historical GamerGate artifact and not pulled up in the Rust community in 2021.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#479

Post by robocat »

mjburgess wrote: post #272
coldpie wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the immediate number of downvotes on this comment is interesting. I'd be interested in hearing from a down-voter on what their objection is Did you edit your comment at some point after publishing to be a little more mild (e.g. remove the word "childish" or something)? I apparently downvoted you at some point, although I don't see anything currently in your comment that would have caused me to do that. I'm not sure…

Thank you for your reply. I did make a minor edit for tone, but I only added my downvote-edit when several downvotes came in after this -- as I then assumed it was a content issue.

Fixing poor tone is definitely great, although I suggest if you edit, then make that clear, as otherwise you confuse people and people will silently assume you are acting in bad faith.

Note that I often downvote any mention of the word “downvote”: I am sure you asked in good faith, but as a sweeping generalisation, commenting on voting doesn’t improve conversation. Not knowing why you get downvotes is a “make you think” feature IMHO. I also believe excessively caring about votes is a red flag: some of the best commenters seem to be fairly neutral about caring what the HN voters think.

Not trying to start a conversation about voting and maybe my comment deserves downvotes. I am answering your implied question about why you might get a downvote even after your corrections to “tone”.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#480

Post by dang »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #235

> You'll never get everyone to settle on the same moral values so it's inevitable that you'll get someone who is unapologetic about some value they hold. I'm less familiar with Rust community moderation, but as an example of what not to do, I would offer up the Go maintainers' strategy of advertising unrelated, partisan, ideological content on their web pages and then shutting down any kind of critical conversation a…

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29307409.
Post reply on HN