41–50 of 122 posts
This appears to be the source of the backlash: https://izzys.casa/2024/11/on-safe-cxx/
And their specific criticisms of the contributor this post is discussing, are very mild but full of personal attacks and expletives?
This slashdot article has a big gap in it 1. Person publishes a thing with a title including the word “Question” 2. People say this title has some resonance to do with the Nazi genocide and ask him to change it 3. He refuses to change it 5. He gets expelled from the committee You see the missing piece? Unlike the title, the body text doesn’t say he was expelled for the title or even for refusing to change it. It says…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article clearly has gaps simply by not being an hour long read on the Atlantic, one obvious gap is that it doesn't seem to have a statement from the person removed after they were removed.
> one obvious gap is that it doesn't seem to have a statement from the person removed after they were removed. I think the article is written by the person that was removed. It is lacking any statement of the standard foundation who removed him. No such statement exists, even on the internal committee mailing list it is just an "fyi, that person is no longer on the committee" without any reasons. I can piece somethin…
As far as I am concerned this whole thing might not have happened until I see another couple of sources.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Interesting that you did not choose to voice your opinions using your main accounts on that community then Yes, it's interesting that someone opted to use an alternate account to discuss a contentious issue on a platform rife with censorship and deplatforming.
Why does it so often seem that the people complaining about censorship are the ones punching down? Why is it so often someone's right to complain and make problems for others but never concern about people's right to be tolerated when they're being decent humans? Either people need to be banned who insult others and use slurs and those who maliciously push right up against the rules, or they will bully people out. Lo…
This appears to be the source of the backlash: https://izzys.casa/2024/11/on-safe-cxx/
> Andrew Tomazos submitted P3403, a paper titled “The Undefined Behavior Question” (which HOOBOY man we’re just knocking it out of the fucking park with possible anti-semitic dog whistles today aren’t we?)
Riiiight. To be fair apart from that their criticism of Tomasoz seems relatively justifiable, if unnecessarily angry. Tomasoz has said that "almost noone" has ever written anything productive in Rust, which is a stupid thing to say. And he thinks ChatGPT is on par with humans now, which is also pretty obviously untrue.
Idiots all round.
This appears to be the source of the backlash: https://izzys.casa/2024/11/on-safe-cxx/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was clearly not - as it was not the comment referenced in the ban. That - again - is an objective truth. It word in the other comment was also not a slur, but - surprise surprise - the objective truth, again.
Saying "XXX is an asshole" if XXX is in fact an asshole is also the objective truth, yet warrants removal for insulting someone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> jump into wild nonsense conspiracy theory or extreme bigotry. Did they? The commenter was referring to "Simple Sabotage Field Manual", by the CIA. It's a very commonly cited list of actions to take, or that someone would take, to impede the effectiveness of an organization. The commenter was not saying "CIA did it, and birds aren't real".
Yeah appealing to that book is literally conspiracy nonsense when you're talking about a group of engineers trying to do good engineering. That appeal fundamentally means that there are people trying to actively sabotage a thing, that by itself is a conspiracy theory particularly when you consider that much of the standards committee has been doing standardization work for ages, and all of them are experienced engine…
It is "LOL" to read that only literally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not sure complaining on HN about being banned from a subreddit makes much sense.
I think it's important context that this huge issue is being silenced on the largest c++ community
eg in linux, git exists because of the Larry McEvoy Bitkeeper drama, there was the Eric S Raymond kernel build config drama, there were numerous Reiserfs and devfs dramas, etc etc etc. In the gnu/fsf world we have had the recent guy leaves because he doesn't like the fact that treesitter is the standard c++ mode drama, you had the emacs vs xemacs dramas, numerous "RMS intervenes to prevent people having an intermediate representation in the GCC compiler" dramas, etc etc. The list is incredibly long. People fight and lose political battles. They leave some committee that most people don't care about. Nothing really important is affected in any way.
Here as someone who was not involved it seems both sides are a bit unreasonable, and some guy has left the standards committee as a result. Really doesn't seem like you complaining about how reddit mods have responded to your posting there has any relevance here.