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

891–900 of 912 posts

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#891

Post by temikus »

zionic wrote: post #462
ferdowsi wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely, yes. A growing community needs healthy management in order to avoid reputational damage to the core language. There's no shortage of guidance to "stay away from X tech because the community is toxic and non-serious"

In my experience the people who, when asked about the technical merits of X, immediately dive into value judgements of a “community” around it are best ignored. If these types of people are in leadership positions, it’s too late and you need to move. If they’re below you, then you need to limit their reach and upward mobility. Usually fair application of performance standards will flush them out anyways. Often people…

Woah, mate. I think that way of thinking might be more-than-slightly career limiting.

The community does play a role in the ecosystem you’re buying into. You will most likely need to send PR’s / bug reports in at some point. If the core team tends to ignore bugs/external contributions, it is a point to consider.

Furthermore, if your first knee-jerk reaction to the behaviour you think undesirable in reports is to “limit their reach and upward mobility” I think you need to think seriously about what mentorship means.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#892

Post by CRConrad »

native_samples wrote: post #525
tinco wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel it's a bit of a tautology, the fact that they're resigning already clearly communicates there's an irreconcilable difference between the mod team and the core team. If the core team comes with an explanation that would make light of the situation surely the new mod team would be skeptical. That said, there is still a bit of a game left to be played. The mod team just played their trump card, by instantly makin…

"by keeping the specifics close to the chest they both keep their integrity" Odd code of honour there. They've made a lot of dramatic insinuations about other Rust contributors, basically asserted that they're all bad people, and provided no detail. That's the opposite of integrity.

No, they've only said that "something happened". That could mean as little as "one person did something". What they're accusing the rest of the core team of is not being a part of it, nor even necessarily of explicitly condoning it -- just of not explicitly doing, or allowing the moderation team to do, something about it. That may be bad enough, but IMO nowhere near as "dramatic" as "assert[ing] that they're all bad people".

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#893

Post by CRConrad »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #324
cycomanic wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you just say "we don't want to be moderators anymore" nothing would change would it? The whole point of the statement is that the mod-team believes something in the organisational structure needs to change. What would you have done in that case?

I would explain what went wrong. It's clear that their organizational suggestions were prompted by a member of the core team doing something they consider terribly wrong - how can it be so bad the Rust community has to know about it yet not bad enough that the community needs to know what it was?

> I would explain what went wrong.

They did: What went wrong was that the mod team doesn't have the power to mod the core team.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#894

Post by CRConrad »

WithinReason wrote: post #217
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…

You could say it's demeaning towards the Core Team, which violates point 6 of the Rust Code of Conduct.

Sure -- you could say anything: "The moon is made of green cheese". There, see? But me saying that doesn't make it true.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#895

Post by fastball »

LAC-Tech wrote: post #758
fastasucan wrote: post #747

Is this related to this, where of member of the core team is in some drama in the node community? https://archive.md/f10KK Also: https://archive.md/xaa5v

Who in that thread is a member of the Rust core team?

What do you mean? Literally the person those threads are about (Ashley Williams) is a member of the Rust core team[1].

[1] https://www.rust-lang.org/governance/teams/core

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#896

Post by fastball »

bitwize wrote: post #424

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.

I think you have it almost completely backwards.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#897

Post by fastball »

budabudimir wrote: post #787

Does anybody actually care about the moderation team anyway? CoC is also just set of guidelines that people abide by anyway in most situations, but doesn't prevent anybody from being an asshole. When somebody is an asshole, random set of people can't really do anything about it.

You can if you empower them to kick people off the core team if they egregiously violate the CoC.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#898

Post by CRConrad »

diegocg wrote: post #360
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…

Back in the day, Linux (and other FOSS projects) where for geeks only. You invested your free time on it because you liked it. People could be aggressive against you, you would leave and nobody gave a shit. Modern FOSS projects such as Linux or Rust are more than something for geeks. Lot of people gets paid to work on it. For many, being an expert in an important project is a career, not just a job. People are "force…

> The people who are being accused of being nasty are the _core_ team.

As I read it, the people who are being accused of being nasty are, for all we know, perhaps just one of the core team.

The rest of the core team are being accused of, at most, not being willing (and/or able?) to do, or let the mod team do, something about that.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#899

Post by CRConrad »

cyber_kinetist wrote: post #669
avinassh wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the mod team who resigned were precisely the ones behind moderating those Reddit/Discourse threads though. I thought same as well, but seems reddit mods are different: > Please note that the official Rust moderation team is not the same organization as the team that moderates the subreddit here on /r/rust. The subreddit is an unofficial space, and though it is frequented by many who are affiliated with the proj…

Yes, as you’ve said, some of the mods in the Mod team were also the subreddit mods, and they deleted the comments and locked the threads by their own volition (even without requirement from the Core team, so this reinforces my interpretation). It’s likely that the Mod team wasn’t adversarial with the Core team from the start, but tensions gradually grew as the drama surrounding the core team got unmanageable.

> Yes, as you’ve said, some of the mods in the Mod team were also the subreddit mods, and they deleted the comments and locked the threads by their own volition (even without requirement from the Core team, so this reinforces my interpretation)

But AFAICS the core team being involved in moderation activities has nothing to do with Reddit. That quote above on how the teams were supposed to cooperate was about moderation of the official Rust forums, wasn't it? Reddit isn't one of those.

So if you're seeing your interpretation confirmed, that's just... Wrong. It doesn't confirm anything of the kind.

Re: Rust Moderation Team Resigns

#900

Post by CRConrad »

DarkCrusader2 wrote: post #472

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 membe…

> Why is this discourse happening in public?

Because that's the appropriate scope to discuss what the moderation team wanted to start a discussion about: Processes and structures.

> They want to use public opinion to bring reforms to the Rust governance but not divulge any details?

What they said was basically "Someone did something shitty, we wanted to clean up the discussion, but couldn't because of the current structure where the core team isn't | doesn't see itself as being under any obligation to listen to the moderation team".

Those are all the "details" needed for the subject of the discussion, namely processes and structures. The details of the original "shitty thing" are irrelevant; the same (lack of appropriate) processes and structures applies to any such incident involving the core team.

This all seems pretty self-evident to me; I'm dumbfounded by how many commenters here on HN can't seem to grasp this fundamental but utterly simple difference.

Your quote from the subreddit only shows that the moderators there do get it (no wonder, being partly the same people), and are therefore (quite properly IMO) trying to quell speculation about the (irrelevant!) "original shitty thing".

It shouldn't be so hard to see that there's absolutely nothing wrong with that either.

Post reply on HN