[Traster]

That article from Shnatsel is really stunning, just everything about is negative and snarky- to a comical point. His avatar is a cartoon pony doing a facepalm! I find it kind of funny that the author of this has singled out reddit for criticism when seemingly prominent members of the Rust community are perfectly willing to be so openly toxic.

[zozbot234]

Being negative and snarky about crappy, hacked-together code that might cause security issues all over the place is not a bad thing. Yes, most of the snark there is about 'http' crate with its weird custom implementation of basic data structures.

[Traster]

'Crappy' and 'Hacked-together' are literally just insults, they don't carry real technical criticism and frankly they just continue to undermine the credibility of the author. The fact is that 'crappy' code is the most used http crate by far. Clearly everyone in the rust community must be an idiot to be using it. I'm sure the author went off and wrote a totally safe replacement for it. See, now we all get to be dicks to each other rather than actually working to fix stuff.

[zozbot234]

The first step in working to fix stuff is being aware of the issues - there's nothing "insulting" about that. Unsafe blocks without any clearly-stated rationale and safety analysis is quite subpar quality. Just because it's common and a "most used crate" does not make it OK, leftpad was widely used too.

[dnorman]

_It's not what you say but how you say it_

With all due respect, you are not the universal arbiter of "crappy"-ness and "hacked-together"-ness, nor is anybody else. My guess is that you have concerns about the library, and you are absolutely within your right to say so. Your concerns may even have significant substance to them; or perhaps there is additional perspective that could change your mind.

Unfortunately, presenting your view and judgement as a statement of objective fact not only shuts down potentially valid counter-argumentation, but it's also inflammatory/insultory because it misrepresents your agency in the situation, and diminishes the efforts/personhood of those who contributed to the library.

It's understandable that you might want to use such phrasing as short-hand from time to time, but saying it out loud, especially in a public venue is regrettably demonstrative of a lack of self-awareness. It drowns out your message regardless of its merit, and pushes other people away. It's a reductive way of thinking, and it does everybody (including yourself) a disservice.

In the words of Groucho Marx "I don't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member."

We could all choose be sour and jaded, fighting over scraps in a futile search for self-worth –OR– we could each take it upon ourselves to be the standard-bearers of what was, and hopefully will remain, a warm and inviting place for meritorious debate. I choose the latter.

[dnorman]

It is absolutely a bad thing to be negative and snarky. It sews resentment within the community and taints potentially valid points. One can express legitimate concerns and be heard without putting oneself on a pedestal or diminishing the self-worth of others. We as a community must take responsibility for fostering a merit-based discourse, and reject pettiness and snark.

[zozbot234]

What sews resentment is being repeatedly dismissive of serious problems, as we're seeing with this hackish use of 'unsafe' features - that's an attitude that diminishes the self-worth of others, if I ever saw any. If anything, a bit of irony and snark can be helpful in underlining a sharp, pointed critique, while de-escalating the sorts of petty, antagonizing attitudes that we've seen in this case.

[dnorman]

I think I understand what you are getting at. Though there may be disagreement on exactly where the lines should be drawn, I think it’s important to underscore the value of patience on the part of everyone in the conversation. The rust community has a position on these things, but perhaps it isn’t as well-documented or refined as it could be.

No doubt, having to contend with this issue is frustrating for all parties. I think it’s important however to help people feel heard and respected even if we don’t agree with them. One of the burdens as a pillar of the community is the necessity to rise above that frustration (articulating it in an emotionally intelligent manner when necessary) – to focus on educating, and hearing constructive criticism.

That said, candidly it’s not helpful to talk about using snark as a means of being heard. It’s like saying “I’ll put down my weapons after you put down yours”

Let’s not bury the lede here: people are coming to Rust because they see, and are excited by its potential. They are passionate about making the language better. I think we should hear them, search for patience, and disagree without being disagreeable. We will go a LOT further together through collaboration than we can through divisive rhetoric.