Instead of acknowledging that they're engaged in an interesting, unusual, and important experiment, they just say that everything else sucks. The whole premise of the existence of the group is more or less that most software is written by and for inept rubes.
On the other hand, maybe their exclusionary attitude is what helps keep the interesting, unusual, and important experiment alive. I know a lot of people who really enjoy using dwm, st, dmenu, surf, etc. They are indeed good, non-sucky programs, if you don't mind writing some light-duty C code and recompiling to update your config. Who am I to judge? But you have to acknowledge that this is a very unusual definition of "sucking less".
Nonetheless I like most suckless projects, especially st and dmenu are fantastic. Even though the push against bloat is more needed on the internet. I'm tired of all the tracking, loading times and memory usage, despite ad blockers.
There was some cool 9p roots that were genuinely distinct, but it didn't seem to really take hold strongly across the community.
But yeah, there were allegedly some un-good community members too, and I'd fully believe the community itself has improved a lot.
On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be any correlation between rude behaviour and high levels of technical quality, nor is there any plausible explanation for such a correlation.
My hunch is that any successful project with a rude atmosphere succeeds in spite of the rudeness.
In practice, however, many open source projects have socially dominant developers who incessantly rewrite everything and introduce bugs until some introvert correctness advocate explodes.
There is no way of dealing nicely with passive aggressive socially dominant people. They just continue their game until someone calls them out directly.
These days, of course, the introvert is canceled and they can carry on.
The Rust community is one of them. Regardless of whether it is successful as a recruitment tool, regardless of the effect on productivity, building a kind community is worthwhile just for the sake of its members.
Because life is short, and every hour that we spend enjoying ourselves rather than enveloped by hostility is a treasure.
I dream of open source software communities with a similar ethos, but they must exist within a vast sea of tech industry assholery and misogyny, and are so easily swamped.
I suspect that being derisive and dismissive is often a coping mechanism for when a person realizes they don't know how to answer a question but doesn't want to admit it.
"Difference" is a semantically overloaded word. The kind of differences that are needed to move software forward aren't the kind of superficial differences that might signal creative diversity in other industries, like music, where cultural background is a significant influence on creative output.
My heart remains in the independent music industry, not here. The tech industry is a horrible place.
Even if you've never had to interact with them, it's easy to see that social signaling is more important to the rust community than doing good work. Last time I was in the Rust discord, their channel logo was literally the rust logo over a the gay flag with lines for black and brown people added. Wtf?
I've submitted probably >100kloc to various open source projects over my career, and the weird politicking and immature behavior of the Rust community soured me on contributing to the Rust ecosystem almost immediately.
This sort of hateful comment is why the tech industry is a horrible place. Even in the best pockets of the tech industry, like HN, intolerance is treated as a legitimate enough perspective to be worthy of endless debate.
And then people furrow their brows over why tech's demographics are so warped. eye roll
There's no fix, no hope. The tech tradition of "open debate" guarantees an endless supply of comments like this.