4 ms·
In response to the moderation team resignation – Inside Rust Blog
- Rebelgecko 5y agoI read the statement twice and I'm having a hard time extracting any substantial information from it. I guess they announced that they'll have more announcements in the future?
- Zealotux 5y agoThat statement looks like a very wordy "Seen" notification.
- GolDDranks 5y agoI don't know if this counts as substantial, but: 1) This breaks the silence, so it's effectively says "duly noted, please wait a bit more as we are trying to make sense of things". 2) The post is signed not only by the Core team members, but other team leads and Foundation directors. This implies that they are in working terms and care enough to think about PR, in form of this post. 3) People share the concern for the long term health of the Rust project. I don't see any reason to think this wouldn't be true, as I know that most people on the list are sincere (what I've witnessed via Twitter/GitHub interactions) and are doing huge amounts of volunteer work to support Rust.
- wdroz 5y agoThere was a lot of speculations in the previous thread [0]. I read some stories/link and now I'm sad. Even if this is not the reason, knowing how toxic are some people at the top, make me just sad. [0] -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29306845 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29306845
- GiorgioG 5y agoI hope all the folks that came out of the woodwork to shit on the .NET Foundation a few weeks ago don’t give the Rust team a pass here.
- recursivedoubts 5y agocan anyone clarify exactly what the issue is here? it seems like there was a specific situation that was not being handled on the core rust team, but all the articles I see posted around it appear to intentionally avoid specifics, without which it is hard to judge who is in the right here
- vlmutolo 5y agoThere's currently no real information to consume about whatever's happening. I understand not wanting to create drama and/or assign blame, but these public announcements aren't helpful communication. There's no real information to extract from them, so the only reasonable thing to do is ignore them until the core/mod team wants to actually tell us something.
- CRConrad 5y ago> all the articles I see posted around it appear to intentionally avoid specifics That's because the specifics of whatever shitty thing someone on the core team may have done are irrelevant. The issue raised by the moderation team is about structures and processes: the fact that the core team [isn't | doesn't see itself as being] under the purview of the moderation team. That problem would be the same whatever shitty thing whoever on the core team did, so those details just don't matter.