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

421–430 of 912 posts

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#421

Post by eldavido »

throwawaygh wrote: post #128
simion314 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

Maybe it will help to explicate what rubs me the wrong way about "corporate HR". The facade of process masking Machiavellian reality is what rubs me the wrong way. I'm always astounded by folks who don't understand that companies are feudal kingdoms and that all the stuff about processes and protecting people who are innocent/do the right thing is just hot air. And I've never been on the wrong side of HR, so this isn…

I have a nagging feeling the rules are different in fields like sales, trading, sports, or others where performance is more precisely quantified.

The reality, somewhat sad in my view, is that in most places, software shops, architecture firms, academia, pretty much anywhere where individual measurement isn't possible and most work is done in teams, most performance reviews are a thin veneer over a high school popularity contest. You get ahead by being liked, something that's at best loosely correlated to how much work you get done, or at what quality.

Of note, the best manager I worked for (in software) ran a great team by making work about the work, not being liked, or delivering great powerpoints, or other secondary things.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#422

Post by lukebitts »

unanswered wrote: post #151

Goodbye and good riddance. Rust is growing up, and it absolutely does not need a cadre of petulant preteens claiming moral authority over every user of the language (or at least every user who wants to discuss the language with others in public).

You don't know what you talking about if you think the mod team is "petulant preteens" and not professionals who have moved the language forward in leaps and bounds.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#423

Post by canaus »

dolni wrote: post #228

I don't believe proper free software projects require significant moderation of behavior between individuals. If someone says something that rises to the level of a crime, report it to your local authorities. Otherwise, if a person is generally toxic enough, they will be worked around. Note that expelling a person from a project for being a jerk in one or more instances may do more harm than good. What is the value o…

The classic "free market will decide if being an asshole is worth it to them". This notion is ironic seeing how an entire moderation team resigned. Sounds like they decided it wasn't worth it.

Outing toxic contributors so they don't actively corrupt and corrode the project is tantamount to the long-term success of a project. And you don't need to break the law to be deemed too negative to be necessary.

> Choose your tradeoff carefully.

What an unsettling comment.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#424

Post by bitwize »

Sounds like the core team wants to get shit done, and the kind of people in the Rust community who open bugs on the philosophers in the dining philosophers example not being gender- and ethnically diverse enough are assmad about it.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#425

Post by ncmncm »

rocqua wrote: post #162
Daishiman wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the C++ core committee have central forums for public discussion of features or is it exclusively a design-by-committee thing with mostly closed-door meetings?

I believe it has both. As far as I know, there are public discussions taken as advisory. Then the actual standards are written in a design-by-committee process. I believe those design meetings have public minutes, but participation requires being a member of the standards committee. I believer membership of the committee is possible through sponsorship with some seats being reserved for community members with high st…

It has a five-member "Directions Committee", vacancies filled by invitation. The group's minutes are not public, but they have no authority beyond their persuasiveness. The members are there because they were already respected.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#426

Post by cbm-vic-20 »

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…

The vast majority of open source projects do not create their own open source license- most of them choose from a relatively small selection of widely used licenses (GPL, BSD, MIT, Apache, etc.).

Why then do so many project choose to roll their own CoC? I'd expect that there would also be a relatively small handful of widely used CoCs to choose from, and a project could pick based on their projects' needs.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#427

Post by donatj »

ziddoap wrote: post #350
donatj wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. If you're going to accuse someone of something, have details.

It's a resignation, not a prosecution. Edit: If it helps, imagine a time you quit your job. Did you provide a datestamped list of incidents that lead to your decision to quit? Or were you, by chance, slightly more vague and provide something along the lines of: "The culture/fit/hours/goals/growth do not align with mine so I am resigning."?

By the public nature of it, it's a bit of a persecution.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#428

Post by BongoMcCat »

dolni wrote: post #228

I don't believe proper free software projects require significant moderation of behavior between individuals. If someone says something that rises to the level of a crime, report it to your local authorities. Otherwise, if a person is generally toxic enough, they will be worked around. Note that expelling a person from a project for being a jerk in one or more instances may do more harm than good. What is the value o…

I don't really understand your comment.

Are the group that you are calling "snowflakes" people who want there to be a system in place to remove people from a project, or is it the opposite?

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#429

Post by BoardsOfCanada »

Shoue wrote: post #173
quotemstr wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterexample: Linux, GCC, Python, and practically the entire free software ecosystem from before the current crazy for hall-monitory-y supervision from above. It is simply demonstrably, factually, clearly not true that a growing community needs the kind of structures that Rust imposed on itself. It really makes me sad that a certain kind of person these days sees some kind of censorious overlord as essential for th…

Linux with Linus, who famously had to change his abusive tone? GCC with Richard Stallman, accused of various kinds of sexual misconduct? Python, which felt it necessary to impose a CoC eventually? Your counter examples are questionable at best.

But Linux had ~20 million lines of code and billions of installs before Linus' change of tone, so I think it is a good counter example.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#430

Post by SamoyedFurFluff »

jacquesm wrote: post #342
loeg wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public shaming by respected community members is probably somewhat effective. However, they chose not to do that here. Without knowing more, I have to trust their judgment. But I recognize that it’s unsatisfying.

This has a much worse effect though. Instead of damaging a single member they are now damaging the whole core team by leaving it unspecific, and they are damaging Rust as well.

It might be that the details would also damage the core team and The Rust community much worse with a flood of people leaving or people being targeted for harassment/abuse.
Post reply on HN