team

I haven't rigorously tracked all of the instances I've seen of this happening over the years, but I've tried to quickly find some more prominent examples for you. This bug report, for example, has various "This comment has been minimized.", "rust-lang deleted a comment from ...", "rust-lang locked and limited conversation to collaborators" interference: https://github.com/rust-lang/team/pull/671 A Reddit thread discussing the situation from that bug report mentioned above has numerous "[removed]" comments and down-voted comments: https://old.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/qzme1z/moderation_tea... When Rust is discussed here, it's common enough for reasonable and relevant Rust-related comments to be voted down, sometimes severely. These threads have some examples I quickly found via a search of high-activity Rust submissions: https://news.ycom

It's just as true today, though. When the Rust mod team resigned en masse in 2021, it was announced by a programmer (the author of ripgrep) [0], and the conflict was with the core team (also programmers). A supermajority of the contributors to open source projects are programmers, so most famous meltdowns are going to be conflicts between programmers, not between programmers and the tiny minority of non-technical contributors. I'm still waiting for anyone to give an example of an open source project meltdown that was triggered by non-technical contributors. [0] https://github.com/rust-lang/team/pull/671

> that operates with so much secrecy that their leadership team is anonymous The Rust leadership team is not anonymous; you can read about them on the rust-lang.org website [1]. The much-discussed "leadership chat" was created to enable process-all-the-way RFC acceptance earlier this year [2] and has been updated twice since then [3][4]. There was also public-facing communication about this [5]. I believe GP is referring to JT (and others) choosing not to name the people who decided to downgrade JeanHeyd Meneide's talk from keynote status. Those people have since publicly named themselves in relation to the incident. 1: https://www.rust-lang.org/governance 2: https://github.com/rust-lang/team/commit/3700516795a293493e8... 3: https://github.com/rust-lang/team/commit/09717c6540c47663960... 4: https://github.com/rust-lang/team/commit/2cea991

they linked their (user)names: https://github.com/rust-lang/team/blob/2cea9916903fffafbfae6...

> Lastly, for anyone reading > PROVIDE GOOD FEEDBACK. A "f**** you" is not feedback. Is it even fixable? Was the root cause of the entire moderation team's resignation resolved? [1] Also, anime. [2] [1] https://github.com/rust-lang/team/pull/671 [2] https://github.com/ThePrimeagen/anime/issues/1

It'd be awesome to hear the real narrative around the infighting of Rust's former maintainers and moderators. So far, I've just been watching the sparks fly from the outside. Like your resignation note where the Core Team was alleged to "unaccountable" https://github.com/rust-lang/team/pull/671 and implied that to be untrustworthy. Or like how maintainers called Zig a "massive step backward" for the industry https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32783244. Memories change awfully quickly when positions are up in the air though. If there's an investigative report, I'm sure it can settle some of the open questions around nepotism and the downfall of the original leadership https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28633113.

Apologies, I accidentally confused matklad with jonas-schievink, a different r-a contributor that recently became a rust project alumni [1]. It seems matklad is still active on r-a. [1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/team/pull/931

Yeah, I think the author fails to explain the actual context of the alleged toxicity. Context (in order): 1.) https://archive.fo/f10KK 2.) https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/announcement-ashley-willia... 3.) https://github.com/rustwasm/wasm-pack/issues/914 and https://github.com/rustwasm/wasm-pack/issues/928 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28515306 4.) https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/qzme1z/moderation_tea... and https://github.com/rust-lang/team/pull/671

What this is a response to: https://github.com/rust-lang/team/pull/671. Even having read both, as an outsider, I wouldn’t know what’s going on.

Can someone explain why the development of a computer programming language needs "mod teams" and other stuff? I don't use Rust; does Rust aspire to also be a social network or something? It seems to me, from my outsider's perspective, that Rust has a lot of bureaucracy for bureaucracy's sake. The "teams" directory [0] has two pages worth of files, which I assume are sub-team membership lists? Good grief. [0] https://github.com/rust-lang/team/tree/master/teams

That pr is less ominous than you're making it sound. These are temporary moderators who were on a a different rust moderation team -- https://github.com/rust-lang/team/pull/672

Two new moderators have already been added to replace those who left on a temporary basis: [0], [1] 0: https://github.com/rust-lang/team/commit/7185102aa6261d0181f... 1: https://www.rust-lang.org/governance/teams/moderation

Based on their mods.toml file: https://github.com/rust-lang/team/blob/master/teams/mods.tom... The "description" field says "Helping uphold the code of conduct and community standards" which is why they left. My guess is people could of done literally any number of things that violated the Code of Conduct. They want to not start a witch hunt which is respectable. As someone else around this thread said though, it leaves room to interpret it as the absolute worst. I am going to assume it's not as awful as it seems and might just be something to the tune of differing opinions. Maybe another Linus Torvalds scenario, I rather not make assumptions that are really bad.