3 ms·

I don't know the details of the agreement (if any) between the Rust Foundation and Meneide, but if the Rust Foundation thinks that Meneide broke an agreement th

by mort96 3y ago

I don't know the details of the agreement (if any) between the Rust Foundation and Meneide, but if the Rust Foundation thinks that Meneide broke an agreement then I'll let them allege that. I don't know how much use there is to speculating about it. In any case, the Rust Project has made it clear that they're not interested in the compile time reflection the way Shepherd's Oasis was doing it, so I'm not sure what use there would be in completing that work. You seem to be jumping around in this conversation, unwilling to stick to one point. Earlier, it seemed like your main complaint was his conduct. When I challenged you on that, you didn't back that up, you jumped over to this grant money speculation. If your issue with him is that you suspect foul play regarding grant money, why didn't you lead with that? If your issue with him is his conduct, why didn't you attempt to make any arguments for why his conduct is problematic when challenged on it?

wubalubadubdub 3y ago
[flagged]
- mort96 3y ago
  Disagreeing with something isn't the same as glossing over it. You didn't say anything of substance, just an empty accusation of "fits of anger, uncharitable accusations to others, vindictiveness"; so there was nothing to address. > JeanHeyd has a tendency to take any criticism to his work, and his technical opinions has meritless. He has a history of implying that there's bigotry, and that objection is the same as obstruction. The very source of this issue is that there were apparently people in the leadership who took serious issues with the direction of the compile time proposal, but were seemingly unwilling to have the discussion about technical merits. If he has a history of creating drama from technical criticism of his work, this RustConf fiasco is certainly not an instance of that. You, however, have a history (in this discussion at least) of claiming something without backing it up. It would be very helpful if you actually linked to examples of him doing the things you're criticising him for, both on this point and the others.
  - wubalubadubdub 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - mort96 3y ago
      Listen, I'm getting tired of this discussion. If you link to anything at all which confirms your claim that his problem in the RustConf/compile-time computation debacle is that someone criticized his work on a technical level, I'll just accept that you're correct and move on. If not... well. I'm done.
      - wubalubadubdub 3y ago
        I have through this discussion asserted that JeanHeid started this drama over a perceived slight for having his talk downgraded. I have separately mentioned that JeanHeyd is a person who has issue taking criticism, but I have not claimed in this thread that this rust debacle was precipitated by this trait of his. I did provide enough reasoning above for all this, but you again ignored, and didn't address any of it. You have claimed that people were sabotaging his work. The onus of the evidence is on you. All public statements we've seen are that there might have been concerns, but before these concerns were discussed, JeanHeyd went full nuclear mode over his talk getting downgraded.
        mort96 3y ago
        >> This RustConf fiasco is certainly not an instance of [his tendency to take any criticism to his work, and his technical opinions [as] meritless and [his] history of implying that there's bigotry, and that objection is the same as obstruction] > It absolutely is This is you claiming that "this rust debacle was precipitated by this trait of his." Even if you're walking that back, you could've linked to anything which shows that "this trait of his" is anything more than your assertions. You haven't. Also, I haven't claimed that anyone has been sabotaging his work. Goodbye.
        dangitdangitda 3y ago

by mort96 3y ago

wubalubadubdub 3y ago

[flagged]

mort96 3y ago
Disagreeing with something isn't the same as glossing over it. You didn't say anything of substance, just an empty accusation of "fits of anger, uncharitable accusations to others, vindictiveness"; so there was nothing to address. > JeanHeyd has a tendency to take any criticism to his work, and his technical opinions has meritless. He has a history of implying that there's bigotry, and that objection is the same as obstruction. The very source of this issue is that there were apparently people in the leadership who took serious issues with the direction of the compile time proposal, but were seemingly unwilling to have the discussion about technical merits. If he has a history of creating drama from technical criticism of his work, this RustConf fiasco is certainly not an instance of that. You, however, have a history (in this discussion at least) of claiming something without backing it up. It would be very helpful if you actually linked to examples of him doing the things you're criticising him for, both on this point and the others.
- wubalubadubdub 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - mort96 3y ago
    Listen, I'm getting tired of this discussion. If you link to anything at all which confirms your claim that his problem in the RustConf/compile-time computation debacle is that someone criticized his work on a technical level, I'll just accept that you're correct and move on. If not... well. I'm done.
    - wubalubadubdub 3y ago
      I have through this discussion asserted that JeanHeid started this drama over a perceived slight for having his talk downgraded. I have separately mentioned that JeanHeyd is a person who has issue taking criticism, but I have not claimed in this thread that this rust debacle was precipitated by this trait of his. I did provide enough reasoning above for all this, but you again ignored, and didn't address any of it. You have claimed that people were sabotaging his work. The onus of the evidence is on you. All public statements we've seen are that there might have been concerns, but before these concerns were discussed, JeanHeyd went full nuclear mode over his talk getting downgraded.
      - mort96 3y ago
        >> This RustConf fiasco is certainly not an instance of [his tendency to take any criticism to his work, and his technical opinions [as] meritless and [his] history of implying that there's bigotry, and that objection is the same as obstruction] > It absolutely is This is you claiming that "this rust debacle was precipitated by this trait of his." Even if you're walking that back, you could've linked to anything which shows that "this trait of his" is anything more than your assertions. You haven't. Also, I haven't claimed that anyone has been sabotaging his work. Goodbye.
        dangitdangitda 3y ago