5 ms·

> Is there any good way to craft a message like this? "We are resigning and our reasons have been shared privately with X group. <eom>" But since the goal of

> Is there any good way to craft a message like this? "We are resigning and our reasons have been shared privately with X group. <eom>" But since the goal of the whole exercise is to generate publicity and drama, the above was an unacceptable approach and the approach actually taken was highly effective.

zozbot234 5y ago
They're committing to sharing these reasons with other Rust Team members, though. Just not the broader dev community.
- nrabulinski 5y ago
  Then don’t make a whole big public announcement about it. As someone from the outside this just reads like a post specifically to generate drama and attention but not giving details as to direct it at anyone in particular.
  - baseballdork 5y ago
    Not sure that I'd call a PR a "whole big public announcement". Sure, it wound up here, but I don't think you can blame that on the mod team.
    - fragile_frogs 5y ago
      They also posted the resignation on the Rust subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/qzme1z/moderation_team_resignation/ https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/qzme1z/moderation_tea...
      - llogiq 5y ago
        If matthieum hadn't done it, someone else would have (and has; some dupes have appeared and were subsequently removed).
  - quacker 5y ago
    There's a community of external contributors that deserve (or would appreciate) some notification about it though.
  - phoe-krk 5y ago
    > Then don’t make a whole big public announcement about it. I don't understand. How do you resign from a public project without resigning from that public project? If it is not about the resignation but about the message, do you think that a "we are resigning as a whole team that was made pbulic and we do not provide any public reason for that" would work any better?
    - whatshisface 5y ago
      They could have resigned without making a post about it. Is that a good idea? Maybe, it depends on the details we don't know.
      - kbenson 5y ago
        And what, leave the Rust community not knowing that there's no CoC team because they've all resigned over something, but the community wasn't informed? It's not like there's some membership card with paid dues. Their responsibility was to anyone that viewed themselves as part of the Rust community, and consumes anything to do with that community (whether or not they put anything into it). Not informing all the people of that community because it appeases random public commenters would be a far worse failure of their duties than letting the general public gossip.
        whatshisface 5y ago
        >leave the Rust community not knowing that there's no CoC team They did have the option of finding replacements before leaving.
        colejohnson66 5y ago
        Employees have no duty to find replacements for their employer. There's especially no moral duty if your bosses are being jerks. I'd say that logic applies to this situation as well.
      - phoe-krk 5y ago
  - pdpi 5y ago
    Alternative: They step down without an announcement, get replaced, somebody pieces it together and posts it on HN or reddit or something, and now you have all the same drama from announcing it publicly, plus all the added drama from the "secret step down".
- unanswered 5y ago
  So set `X = "other Rust team members"`. Everything else in the comment was just for drama.
  - cormacrelf 5y ago
    I don't think it was overly dramatic, but otherwise I agree with your point about pointing out another group with whom it has been shared, specifically a neutral party, if public muck-raking must be avoided at all costs. I made a similar point below: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29308197 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29308197
kbenson 5y ago
I think that's an uncharitable interpretation. If your remit is to deal with issues like this, but you find the structure is broken enough that you can't do what you see as your job, what do you do? Going public may be against the point of the group, but it might also be the only way seen to fix the problem and address the problems that prevent your group from doing its job. So you're left with the unenviable option of explicitly doing what your team is not supposed to do in order to try to fix the team so it can function in the future. The responsible thing to do at that point would be to resign, so someone else can come in and gain the benefits you fought for, and your prior breaking of the rules does not taint the team. I think that's the charitable view. I don't know if it's correct, but I do think it's worth considering.

zozbot234 5y ago

They're committing to sharing these reasons with other Rust Team members, though. Just not the broader dev community.

nrabulinski 5y ago
Then don’t make a whole big public announcement about it. As someone from the outside this just reads like a post specifically to generate drama and attention but not giving details as to direct it at anyone in particular.
- baseballdork 5y ago
  Not sure that I'd call a PR a "whole big public announcement". Sure, it wound up here, but I don't think you can blame that on the mod team.
  - fragile_frogs 5y ago
    They also posted the resignation on the Rust subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/qzme1z/moderation_team_resignation/ https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/qzme1z/moderation_tea...
    - llogiq 5y ago
      If matthieum hadn't done it, someone else would have (and has; some dupes have appeared and were subsequently removed).
- quacker 5y ago
  There's a community of external contributors that deserve (or would appreciate) some notification about it though.
- phoe-krk 5y ago
  > Then don’t make a whole big public announcement about it. I don't understand. How do you resign from a public project without resigning from that public project? If it is not about the resignation but about the message, do you think that a "we are resigning as a whole team that was made pbulic and we do not provide any public reason for that" would work any better?
  - whatshisface 5y ago
    They could have resigned without making a post about it. Is that a good idea? Maybe, it depends on the details we don't know.
    - kbenson 5y ago
      And what, leave the Rust community not knowing that there's no CoC team because they've all resigned over something, but the community wasn't informed? It's not like there's some membership card with paid dues. Their responsibility was to anyone that viewed themselves as part of the Rust community, and consumes anything to do with that community (whether or not they put anything into it). Not informing all the people of that community because it appeases random public commenters would be a far worse failure of their duties than letting the general public gossip.
      - whatshisface 5y ago
        >leave the Rust community not knowing that there's no CoC team They did have the option of finding replacements before leaving.
        colejohnson66 5y ago
        Employees have no duty to find replacements for their employer. There's especially no moral duty if your bosses are being jerks. I'd say that logic applies to this situation as well.
    - phoe-krk 5y ago
- pdpi 5y ago
  Alternative: They step down without an announcement, get replaced, somebody pieces it together and posts it on HN or reddit or something, and now you have all the same drama from announcing it publicly, plus all the added drama from the "secret step down".
unanswered 5y ago
So set `X = "other Rust team members"`. Everything else in the comment was just for drama.
- cormacrelf 5y ago
  I don't think it was overly dramatic, but otherwise I agree with your point about pointing out another group with whom it has been shared, specifically a neutral party, if public muck-raking must be avoided at all costs. I made a similar point below: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29308197 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29308197

kbenson 5y ago

I think that's an uncharitable interpretation. If your remit is to deal with issues like this, but you find the structure is broken enough that you can't do what you see as your job, what do you do? Going public may be against the point of the group, but it might also be the only way seen to fix the problem and address the problems that prevent your group from doing its job. So you're left with the unenviable option of explicitly doing what your team is not supposed to do in order to try to fix the team so it can function in the future. The responsible thing to do at that point would be to resign, so someone else can come in and gain the benefits you fought for, and your prior breaking of the rules does not taint the team. I think that's the charitable view. I don't know if it's correct, but I do think it's worth considering.