4 ms·

Moderating a community is not meant to entertain outsiders, but to prevent escalation within the community. No offense, but what do you expect to be able to co

by pyrale 5y ago

Moderating a community is not meant to entertain outsiders, but to prevent escalation within the community. No offense, but what do you expect to be able to contribute to this situation as an outsider? Would your contribution to the community be improved by additional information?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
abernard1 5y ago
> No offense, but what do you expect to be able to contribute to this situation as an outsider? Who are the "insiders" here? A couple dozen people? Rust is supposed to cater to their user base, not the dramas of a few people who need attention and something to do with their life.
- GolDDranks 5y ago
  They say in the post that they are open for Rust team members to discuss this. So the "insiders" would be Rust team members, I think there would be some hundreds of people. (There are multiple Rust teams, not just Core and Moderation.) Together, they also would have considerable power over the Core team, as the teams have some power in a do-o-cracy sense of the word.
SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
I expect our contributions to the community would be improved by less information. When you're resigning from a position but you don't want to say why, you're supposed to gesture vaguely at personal obligations or career opportunities and leave it at that. "You guys should be mad, but we won't tell you why" makes it impossible for the organization to function. How can the core team lead the project or even appoint new moderators without putting this controversy to rest?
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Exactly, this throws a giant spanner in the works and casts a shadow over whatever comes next. If they wanted to damage Rust in the eyes of the general public they couldn't have done a much more effective job. The lack of maturity on display must be particularly galling to those that give up a substantial chunk of their time to move Rust forward. Dirty laundry is best kept in-house, lest you damage the house.
  - pyrale 5y ago
    > Exactly, this throws a giant spanner in the works and casts a shadow over whatever comes next. Sometimes, throwing a spanner in the works is the good way forward. That's core to stop-the-line manufacturing, for instance. Without more information, it's hard to assess whether that team exhausted other escalation means, so I would wait for more details before judging their decision.
znpy 5y ago
> No offense, but what do you expect to be able to contribute to this situation as an outsider? That's a pointless question. I might want to understand what's going on to understand if it's even worth it to be contributing to the community at all.
- pyrale 5y ago
  I'm not saying a post-mortem once the situation is resolved wouldn't be a good thing. I'm saying that public awareness is not a priority while the issue isn't resolved, and that it may actually be detrimental. > I might want to understand what's going on to understand if it's even worth it to be contributing to the community at all. Usually, when moderation happens, information is best delayed until the problem is solved. That avoids uninvolved parties fanning flames on an ongoing conflict, and when information comes, it's structured rather than a stream of instant reactions. Note that this is true whether the conflict finds a satisfactory resolution or not. If the team that leaves sees that no good resolution is found, they can disclose information later, once resolution attempts have been exhausted. Note that this is from my past mod experience, I'm not involved in moderating the rust community.

by pyrale 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

abernard1 5y ago

> No offense, but what do you expect to be able to contribute to this situation as an outsider? Who are the "insiders" here? A couple dozen people? Rust is supposed to cater to their user base, not the dramas of a few people who need attention and something to do with their life.

GolDDranks 5y ago
They say in the post that they are open for Rust team members to discuss this. So the "insiders" would be Rust team members, I think there would be some hundreds of people. (There are multiple Rust teams, not just Core and Moderation.) Together, they also would have considerable power over the Core team, as the teams have some power in a do-o-cracy sense of the word.

SpicyLemonZest 5y ago

I expect our contributions to the community would be improved by less information. When you're resigning from a position but you don't want to say why, you're supposed to gesture vaguely at personal obligations or career opportunities and leave it at that. "You guys should be mad, but we won't tell you why" makes it impossible for the organization to function. How can the core team lead the project or even appoint new moderators without putting this controversy to rest?

jacquesm 5y ago
Exactly, this throws a giant spanner in the works and casts a shadow over whatever comes next. If they wanted to damage Rust in the eyes of the general public they couldn't have done a much more effective job. The lack of maturity on display must be particularly galling to those that give up a substantial chunk of their time to move Rust forward. Dirty laundry is best kept in-house, lest you damage the house.
- pyrale 5y ago
  > Exactly, this throws a giant spanner in the works and casts a shadow over whatever comes next. Sometimes, throwing a spanner in the works is the good way forward. That's core to stop-the-line manufacturing, for instance. Without more information, it's hard to assess whether that team exhausted other escalation means, so I would wait for more details before judging their decision.

znpy 5y ago

> No offense, but what do you expect to be able to contribute to this situation as an outsider? That's a pointless question. I might want to understand what's going on to understand if it's even worth it to be contributing to the community at all.

pyrale 5y ago
I'm not saying a post-mortem once the situation is resolved wouldn't be a good thing. I'm saying that public awareness is not a priority while the issue isn't resolved, and that it may actually be detrimental. > I might want to understand what's going on to understand if it's even worth it to be contributing to the community at all. Usually, when moderation happens, information is best delayed until the problem is solved. That avoids uninvolved parties fanning flames on an ongoing conflict, and when information comes, it's structured rather than a stream of instant reactions. Note that this is true whether the conflict finds a satisfactory resolution or not. If the team that leaves sees that no good resolution is found, they can disclose information later, once resolution attempts have been exhausted. Note that this is from my past mod experience, I'm not involved in moderating the rust community.