[flagged]
replies(1):
Breaking down the posted article, there’s a lot missing (which the author admits), and it’s not clear really what the goal of the post was other than to say “someone, not me, made an oops. But it’s fine, right, because the community needed this to happen.”
Parts that were particularly odd, that others have said with better words:
- Who imposed this ultimatum on RC? - How long was the timeline to “tighten things up”? It sounds like there was both a decent amount of time and an immediate urgency - it can’t be both. - “We’re nerds who can’t communicate well” (paraphrased) is such a poor argument - I get it, I’ve had to do a lot of work to figure out how to navigate social spaces and how to communicate effectively in professional settings. That said, the author is writing as if they’ve never had a single conversation with a technical person that they didn’t know well; that any conversation about removing or reducing access would be a catastrophe. That’s ridiculous.
It seems that either there was poor planning around this, or someone forgot about the deadline and YOLO’d it, or there was a malicious push to oust some of the biggest contributors under the guise of security.
One thing is clear, regardless of what the root cause of this all was: RC showed a deep lack of respect for the people that make their community what it is, and that stinks.