7 ms·

> "I left because when I felt JeanHeyd's pain and disappointment at being mistreated and betrayed, my heart broke. I wept because of the cruelty. But I also wep

> "I left because when I felt JeanHeyd's pain and disappointment at being mistreated and betrayed, my heart broke. I wept because of the cruelty. But I also wept because I helped create the system that could do this to someone." I’m a bit hesitant to say this out loud, but… you can only cry over this “betrayal”, “mistreatment” and “cruelty” if you have lived a very protected life.

Hendrikto 3y ago
What are you saying? ”Suck it up.“?
- WastingMyTime89 3y ago
  He is saying “be an actual professional and don’t bring a vocabulary pertaining to intimate discussions to the public sphere when what’s discussed is a technical conference.” It’s already barely acceptable in a purely American context. To me as a European, this is extremely off putting and culturally out of line which is a recurring problem with Rust.
  - zozbot234 3y ago
    It's a dog whistle. What the OP is actually saying is that he's extremely angry and pissed off that this was allowed to happen, and he's noping out for that eminently understandable reason. But if he said that in no uncertain terms (as a European very well might in similar circumstances!) he might fall afoul of the official Code of Conduct for being aggressive and threatening towards other contributors. Hence this weird talk about intimate "weeping" and "pain". Make no mistake, this is not some softy empath talk but quite the opposite!
    - naasking 3y ago
      > What the OP is actually saying is that he's extremely angry and pissed off that this was allowed to happen [...] But if he said that in no uncertain terms [...] he might fall afoul of the official Code of Conduct for being aggressive and threatening towards other contributors. So they need reverse psychology to express anger at injustice because of the Code of Conduct? What is this world we're building?
      - surgical_fire 3y ago
        > What is this world we're building? It's the same as the world that existed before. A hundred years ago I would be going to mass on Sunday just so people thought I was a good Christian. Now I nod my empty head in fake agreement to all the "progressive" nonsense being spewed in professional circles. Well, except here. This is essentially a throwaway account with no ties to my professional self. "Give the man a mask and he'll tell you the truth" sort of thing.
        seneca 3y ago
        You're basically correct. The frustration many of us have, largely people slightly older than the core HN crowd, is that for a brief moment in the 90s and early 2000s we didn't have any of this dogma that could demand you nod along. You could be openly gay, openly Christian, conservative, leftist, or apolitical. There were groups that still tried, but they were all too weak. The cultural conservativism of the 80s had no real hold anymore, and the political correctness of the 90s was mostly a joke. People would make fun of their opponents, but everyone openly disagreed. You wouldn't be fired from your job, or banned from otherwise unrelated communities. We really thought that the internet was going to keep making this better. Instead we ended up with the most restrictive and widespread regime that has existed in most of our lifetimes. Luckily that seems to be losing its hold, but the specific doctrine isn't really the point. The frustration is that we had something closer to the ideal, however imperfect, and completely lost it, and have almost an entire generation that has been taught to think that that's a good thing.
        naasking 3y ago
        I think that's mostly true. The rise of New Atheism seemed to coincide with the start of decreased tolerance. Coincidence or cause, I'm not sure.
        TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
        It has nothing to do with New Atheism. You will find just as much drama - if not more - in religious communities of all kinds. I think it has more to do with social media culture, which seems perpetually hyped emotionally. You can't release a press release without claiming to be absolutely super excited for you guys about $mildly_interesting_new_thing. You can't run a non-trivial YouTube or TikTok channel if you don't over-emote wildly all the time. [1] IG is full of people who are incredibly #amazed and #grateful and add the hashtags to prove it. I'm currently watching a YT series where some people visit abandoned parts of London tube stations. There's an insane level of constant emoting. It's like children's TV. Everyone is smiling and happy and just fantastic, and everything they see is awesome, amazing, incredible, and absolutely their favourite thing ever. Which is weird when they're mostly just filming dusty old abandoned corridors, some of which have some historical interest. If this is normal for you, you can't say "I really don't like what happened so I'm going to resign" without turning it into a widescreen tentpole weepy drama movie experience. However or whenever this happened it's clearly normalised now. I think we're going to be stuck with it for a while. [1] I've known people who tried to cut down on the emoting and their stats went right down.
    - rowanG077 3y ago
      So why not just say that. All this dog whistle talk is extremely immature and unprofessional.
      - BizarreByte 3y ago
        Because this is what happens when you try to restrict not only speech, but how community members even express themselves for fear someone might be hurt or offended.
        harpiaharpyja 3y ago
        That's ridiculous. I hope the community fixes that.
    - veidr 3y ago
      [flagged]
    - hnaccount_rng 3y ago
      Why would a “this is what happened and it’s the reason I’m not longer going to be involved in the Rust project going further” possibly be able to violate a Code of Conduct? Sure if you start calling people an asshole or lash out. But that’s similarly uncalled for… Everyone is free to nope out. And people noping out is something that Rust (the community) needs to take into account. _Because_ it depends on them. But as is.. I’m unsure if this kind of emotional involvement is even something Rust (the project) _should_ want
  - vintermann 3y ago
    You know, this pattern: * Person is invited to talk * Person asks "You know about X, right?" * They say "sure, it's no problem" * They talk in private and take decisions in improper venues * The guy is slighted at the last minute, told it is because of X ... is an all too "professional" way to do it. This is how professionals will do it, when they want to let you know they don't like you. With a little deniability, but not too much. If what the complainant alleges is true, there are too much social skill at work here - skill at exquisitely snubbing someone.
- Mordisquitos 3y ago
  I believe there is a wide range of possible emotional reactions between weeping about something on one end and sucking it up on the other.
- surgical_fire 3y ago
  I think he is saying that words such as "cruelty" and "betrayal" have a weight in them that are way out of proportion to the events that took place. I am a bit out of the loop (I don't know who the people involved are), but I tend to agree, I think. Sounds like a mix of miscommunication and group politics. Those are things that people might get upset, but the exaggerated response sounds like a cheap appeal to raw emotions.
- BrotherBisquick 3y ago
  Yes, that or "man up."
  - kbelder 3y ago
    >Suck it up; man up. In our paroxysm of righteous correctionism, we've lost track that that is really good advice, even though crudely phrased.
arijun 3y ago
Pretty sure they’re just using poetic license. Also, this is definitely not true—-a spouse cheating on you would be a “betrayal” but I wouldn’t fault anyone for weeping over it.
- lolinder 3y ago
  Are you really comparing this little spat to marital infidelity? This further emphasizes OP's point—nothing the Rust team can do to you should approach the emotional impact of marital betrayal.
rootw0rm 3y ago
rust needs it's empaths, too. if we can all figure out how to adult, be decent, work together, and understand the strengths/weaknesses of our very different personalities and skills, hopefully we can all continue building cool stuff together without alienating important voices.
- lolinder 3y ago
  > if we can all figure out how to adult Part of adulting is responding proportionally to childish behavior in others. Events like this feel like my toddlers fighting—he takes her pencil so she tears his paper so he hits her so she comes crying to mommy. The adult in the room deescalates, they don't write an emotional blog about how betrayed they feel on behalf of someone else.
  - marcinzm 3y ago
    That depends on the power balance. Adults have power over children. The author does not have power over the people involved. Deescalating when you lack power is often little different from not saying anything at all. This is why most non-generational change to existing power structures involves large groups of very angry people. Same reason complaining about your Google Account getting locked on social media is more effective than spending the rest of your life going through their process. The real question is if the Rust project has an equitable governance structure that minimizes imbalances of power or if it doesn't. If it does then the author should follow that instead of a large angry blog post. If it doesn't then he may as well go with the large angry blog post.
    - lolinder 3y ago
      You don't have to have power to deescalate. We're teaching our children to respond appropriately to conflict—in the situation above, either one of them can deescalate by approaching the conflict reasonably. He could have avoided it altogether by asking nicely for her pencil. She could deescalate by recognizing that he really wanted her pencil and making a trade that they both are happy with. It's hard for them to do because their escalatory actions feel more immediately effective at bringing "justice", but they don't work out in the long run. The cycle of childishness isn't going to be solved by a post that triggers an internet mob, that's just another childish response in the cycle.
ksec 3y ago
> if you have lived a very protected life. You just summarised 98% of all current cultural problem in Silicon Valley.
marcinzm 3y ago
To me it looks like both sides are acting very emotional over the situation and using very loaded language to push their agendas forward. I almost feel the author is using discomfort even more as a weapon than the person who originally complained.
- nullc 3y ago
  Which appears to be one of the underlying cultural flaws in the community to begin with. "Everyone sucks here" is a common situation because bad behavior is often a product of bad project culture.
Hackbraten 3y ago
> you can only cry over this “betrayal”, “mistreatment” and “cruelty” if you have lived a very protected life. For some people, crying is just a way to deal with emotions. So please don’t judge. I’ve been a professional software developer for more than 20 years. I still find myself weeping at work once in a while, especially when overwhelmed with hardship and negative feelings. I don’t see how this would be a sign of living “a very protected life.”
- andrewprock 3y ago
  If your workplace is regularly bringing you to tears, you should start looking for a new position. No one needs a job with that level of emotional overhead.

Hendrikto 3y ago

What are you saying? ”Suck it up.“?

WastingMyTime89 3y ago
He is saying “be an actual professional and don’t bring a vocabulary pertaining to intimate discussions to the public sphere when what’s discussed is a technical conference.” It’s already barely acceptable in a purely American context. To me as a European, this is extremely off putting and culturally out of line which is a recurring problem with Rust.
- zozbot234 3y ago
  It's a dog whistle. What the OP is actually saying is that he's extremely angry and pissed off that this was allowed to happen, and he's noping out for that eminently understandable reason. But if he said that in no uncertain terms (as a European very well might in similar circumstances!) he might fall afoul of the official Code of Conduct for being aggressive and threatening towards other contributors. Hence this weird talk about intimate "weeping" and "pain". Make no mistake, this is not some softy empath talk but quite the opposite!
  - naasking 3y ago
    > What the OP is actually saying is that he's extremely angry and pissed off that this was allowed to happen [...] But if he said that in no uncertain terms [...] he might fall afoul of the official Code of Conduct for being aggressive and threatening towards other contributors. So they need reverse psychology to express anger at injustice because of the Code of Conduct? What is this world we're building?
    - surgical_fire 3y ago
      > What is this world we're building? It's the same as the world that existed before. A hundred years ago I would be going to mass on Sunday just so people thought I was a good Christian. Now I nod my empty head in fake agreement to all the "progressive" nonsense being spewed in professional circles. Well, except here. This is essentially a throwaway account with no ties to my professional self. "Give the man a mask and he'll tell you the truth" sort of thing.
      - seneca 3y ago
        You're basically correct. The frustration many of us have, largely people slightly older than the core HN crowd, is that for a brief moment in the 90s and early 2000s we didn't have any of this dogma that could demand you nod along. You could be openly gay, openly Christian, conservative, leftist, or apolitical. There were groups that still tried, but they were all too weak. The cultural conservativism of the 80s had no real hold anymore, and the political correctness of the 90s was mostly a joke. People would make fun of their opponents, but everyone openly disagreed. You wouldn't be fired from your job, or banned from otherwise unrelated communities. We really thought that the internet was going to keep making this better. Instead we ended up with the most restrictive and widespread regime that has existed in most of our lifetimes. Luckily that seems to be losing its hold, but the specific doctrine isn't really the point. The frustration is that we had something closer to the ideal, however imperfect, and completely lost it, and have almost an entire generation that has been taught to think that that's a good thing.
        naasking 3y ago
        I think that's mostly true. The rise of New Atheism seemed to coincide with the start of decreased tolerance. Coincidence or cause, I'm not sure.
        TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
        It has nothing to do with New Atheism. You will find just as much drama - if not more - in religious communities of all kinds. I think it has more to do with social media culture, which seems perpetually hyped emotionally. You can't release a press release without claiming to be absolutely super excited for you guys about $mildly_interesting_new_thing. You can't run a non-trivial YouTube or TikTok channel if you don't over-emote wildly all the time. [1] IG is full of people who are incredibly #amazed and #grateful and add the hashtags to prove it. I'm currently watching a YT series where some people visit abandoned parts of London tube stations. There's an insane level of constant emoting. It's like children's TV. Everyone is smiling and happy and just fantastic, and everything they see is awesome, amazing, incredible, and absolutely their favourite thing ever. Which is weird when they're mostly just filming dusty old abandoned corridors, some of which have some historical interest. If this is normal for you, you can't say "I really don't like what happened so I'm going to resign" without turning it into a widescreen tentpole weepy drama movie experience. However or whenever this happened it's clearly normalised now. I think we're going to be stuck with it for a while. [1] I've known people who tried to cut down on the emoting and their stats went right down.
  - rowanG077 3y ago
    So why not just say that. All this dog whistle talk is extremely immature and unprofessional.
    - BizarreByte 3y ago
      Because this is what happens when you try to restrict not only speech, but how community members even express themselves for fear someone might be hurt or offended.
      - harpiaharpyja 3y ago
        That's ridiculous. I hope the community fixes that.
  - veidr 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - hnaccount_rng 3y ago
    Why would a “this is what happened and it’s the reason I’m not longer going to be involved in the Rust project going further” possibly be able to violate a Code of Conduct? Sure if you start calling people an asshole or lash out. But that’s similarly uncalled for… Everyone is free to nope out. And people noping out is something that Rust (the community) needs to take into account. _Because_ it depends on them. But as is.. I’m unsure if this kind of emotional involvement is even something Rust (the project) _should_ want
- vintermann 3y ago
  You know, this pattern: * Person is invited to talk * Person asks "You know about X, right?" * They say "sure, it's no problem" * They talk in private and take decisions in improper venues * The guy is slighted at the last minute, told it is because of X ... is an all too "professional" way to do it. This is how professionals will do it, when they want to let you know they don't like you. With a little deniability, but not too much. If what the complainant alleges is true, there are too much social skill at work here - skill at exquisitely snubbing someone.
Mordisquitos 3y ago
I believe there is a wide range of possible emotional reactions between weeping about something on one end and sucking it up on the other.
surgical_fire 3y ago
I think he is saying that words such as "cruelty" and "betrayal" have a weight in them that are way out of proportion to the events that took place. I am a bit out of the loop (I don't know who the people involved are), but I tend to agree, I think. Sounds like a mix of miscommunication and group politics. Those are things that people might get upset, but the exaggerated response sounds like a cheap appeal to raw emotions.
BrotherBisquick 3y ago
Yes, that or "man up."
- kbelder 3y ago
  >Suck it up; man up. In our paroxysm of righteous correctionism, we've lost track that that is really good advice, even though crudely phrased.

arijun 3y ago

Pretty sure they’re just using poetic license. Also, this is definitely not true—-a spouse cheating on you would be a “betrayal” but I wouldn’t fault anyone for weeping over it.

lolinder 3y ago
Are you really comparing this little spat to marital infidelity? This further emphasizes OP's point—nothing the Rust team can do to you should approach the emotional impact of marital betrayal.

rootw0rm 3y ago

rust needs it's empaths, too. if we can all figure out how to adult, be decent, work together, and understand the strengths/weaknesses of our very different personalities and skills, hopefully we can all continue building cool stuff together without alienating important voices.

lolinder 3y ago
> if we can all figure out how to adult Part of adulting is responding proportionally to childish behavior in others. Events like this feel like my toddlers fighting—he takes her pencil so she tears his paper so he hits her so she comes crying to mommy. The adult in the room deescalates, they don't write an emotional blog about how betrayed they feel on behalf of someone else.
- marcinzm 3y ago
  That depends on the power balance. Adults have power over children. The author does not have power over the people involved. Deescalating when you lack power is often little different from not saying anything at all. This is why most non-generational change to existing power structures involves large groups of very angry people. Same reason complaining about your Google Account getting locked on social media is more effective than spending the rest of your life going through their process. The real question is if the Rust project has an equitable governance structure that minimizes imbalances of power or if it doesn't. If it does then the author should follow that instead of a large angry blog post. If it doesn't then he may as well go with the large angry blog post.
  - lolinder 3y ago
    You don't have to have power to deescalate. We're teaching our children to respond appropriately to conflict—in the situation above, either one of them can deescalate by approaching the conflict reasonably. He could have avoided it altogether by asking nicely for her pencil. She could deescalate by recognizing that he really wanted her pencil and making a trade that they both are happy with. It's hard for them to do because their escalatory actions feel more immediately effective at bringing "justice", but they don't work out in the long run. The cycle of childishness isn't going to be solved by a post that triggers an internet mob, that's just another childish response in the cycle.

ksec 3y ago

> if you have lived a very protected life. You just summarised 98% of all current cultural problem in Silicon Valley.

marcinzm 3y ago

To me it looks like both sides are acting very emotional over the situation and using very loaded language to push their agendas forward. I almost feel the author is using discomfort even more as a weapon than the person who originally complained.

nullc 3y ago
Which appears to be one of the underlying cultural flaws in the community to begin with. "Everyone sucks here" is a common situation because bad behavior is often a product of bad project culture.

Hackbraten 3y ago

> you can only cry over this “betrayal”, “mistreatment” and “cruelty” if you have lived a very protected life. For some people, crying is just a way to deal with emotions. So please don’t judge. I’ve been a professional software developer for more than 20 years. I still find myself weeping at work once in a while, especially when overwhelmed with hardship and negative feelings. I don’t see how this would be a sign of living “a very protected life.”

andrewprock 3y ago
If your workplace is regularly bringing you to tears, you should start looking for a new position. No one needs a job with that level of emotional overhead.