[omginternets]

Yes, it is indeed their responsibility. It is also a minor thing.

People sometimes drop the ball, sometimes repeatedly, especially in committees. Public shaming is generally reserved for egregious acts, and so needs to be justified.

Attempting to shame people, without explaining what exactly happened, suggests a hissy fit.

To be clear: I am willing to entertain the accusation that the Rust team is toxic, but that’s a case that needs to be … you know … actually argued.

[XAMPPRocky]

People are free to speak their mind, they don’t have to justify that to you or anyone else.

> Attempting to shame people, without explaining what exactly happened, suggests a hissy fit.

Feels like self-projecting given how much you’re commenting in multiple threads to say “it’s not a big deal”, I don’t think someone who thinks it’s not a big deal would comment and try to argue so much if they actually thought it was.

[omginternets]

Like it or not, there are social norms, one of which is that public accusations need to be substantiated.

That is, I think, a reasonable expectation.

[XAMPPRocky]

Which part do you think is not substantiated?

They did write about compile-time reflection, their talk was part of the conference[1], and now they’re not doing the talk. That’s enough to me take what they say at face value, especially now that in the wake of this there have been resignations in the leadership.

[1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20230523045330/https://rustconf....

[aaomidi]

To me I think this is fully reasonable what they’re doing.

So how do you wanna settle the difference in social norms? Who died and made you the gatekeeper of social norms?