This paragraph from the article expands on the same topic: > One informal structure that governs a lot of Rust and a lot of open source in general (and is ment

This paragraph from the article expands on the same topic: > One informal structure that governs a lot of Rust and a lot of open source in general (and is mentioned in The Tyranny Of Structurelessness) is that of time commitment. The passionate contributor often is willing and able to spend a lot of time on the project. And that time commitment is not always available to others. This is often explicitly stated as a positive virtue: "people who do the work get to decide". But those decisions often affect many other stakeholders, and "the people with the most time" might not represent those stakeholders well, or might lack skills or knowledge for the task at hand. And "putting in more time than others" is also a way -- a fairly unhealthy one -- of dealing with a conflict: rather than addressing it head-on, you just wear the other side out. This can even be employed within a formal structure, if there's wiggle room for "how much input you contribute per unit time". Some people will show up to every city council meeting to push the same agenda. It works, you get your way, and it's not great. The notion applies to communities like Wikipedia and similar even more than to FOSS projects. Except that in that case there's often additional factors at play, like malicious coordination, "meat puppets", "sock puppets", etc.