[flagged]

The irony is that this is probably going to exacerbate social injustice. Cupertino kids are going to be taking extracurricular math through RSM or Kumon in elementary school, and then the Cupertino school district (in the article) says that they have no intention to comply with the recommendations. SF kids aren't going to be exposed to algebra until 9th grade and then get a rude awakening in college when they realize all the cool courses have pre-reqs.

I've heard a good argument that algebra specifically should be moved the other way: teach it in elementary school, when kids are first exposed to arithmetic. There's a really natural progression from addition/subtraction/zero and multiplication/division/one to inverses and identities, and from addition/multiplication to distribution and associativity. My 3-year-old understands that if he has 5 raspberries on his fingers and he takes away one, he has 4, and then if he grabs another one and puts it on his finger, he has 5 again. Not a huge leap from there to the concept of equations, inverse operations, and solving for unknowns.

That's a valid argument, I wasn't aware absolute hospitalization numbers <30 were this low.

… which just leaves the other arguments to get vaccinated. Namely, lesser chance of long-term symptoms and lesser chance of getting infected (last I checked, outbound transmission doesn't seem to be reduced much, but inbound is, so it still serves to slow overall spread.)

The Rust Moderation Team is not the same as the r/rust "mods". Yes, this is confusing.

I'm inclined to believe the rust moderation team even though they haven't disclosed any specifics. The way the core team exercises absolute authority in spite of community complaints has always rubbed me the wrong way. They present a facade of caring while crushing dissent.

I do not recognize most of the core team these days, but Steve Klabnik and Ashley Williams stand out as likely culprits. I have personally submitted an email with the Rust moderation team to complain about Klabnik (and also mod-team member Andrew Gallant) and their abrasive behavior on reddit. Several months later I received a response stating they agreed that Klabnik went over the line and that they would warn him. Meanwhile Ashley "kill all men" Williams has an extremely lengthy reputation for her behavior in open source[1]. When it was announced she was joining the rust community team, there was a large push back from the community but the reddit/discourse mods censored everything[2][3] and the core team chose to let Williams join despite the complaints about her history of racism, sexism, and antagonism.

[1]: https://archive.fo/f10KK

[2]: https://old.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/7nx3cm/announcement_a... (https://archive.fo/ISXJF)

[3]: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/announcement-ashley-willia... (https://archive.fo/9yW9I)

They can be both, but in many of the listed countries there aren't really Amazon workers (at least not warehouse staff), and they are not "[striking] for better working conditions" as stated in the headline.

That is part of the #MakeAmazonPay movement, but it's not all the movement is, and saying that employees are striking in 20 countries is completely false.

They're committing to sharing these reasons with other Rust Team members, though. Just not the broader dev community.

Is there any good way to craft a message like this?

If they outlined specific issues then it would invariably devolve into armchair quarterbacking of those issues rather than the the underlying question of what kinds of checks-and-balances should exist for the Core Team -- gossip, accusations, and political discussions are a lot more fun than debating governance structures.

On the other hand, if no specific issues are raised then people are frustrated by having only a partial understanding. Because it's a lot simpler to evaluate an argument if you already know whose side you're on.