I'm very sorry to hear that Matthew Butterick had some bad experiences. He's been a brilliant and energetic contributor to the Racket community. Clearly, something went wrong.
For what it's worth (looking at some of the comments from people not very familiar), my own experiences with Matthias Felleisen have been positive. (I started contributing to what was then called PLT Scheme around 2000, have had lunch with him twice, and a few times over the years have had some mutually-candid conversations with him, about concerns affecting the project/community.)
While I might describe Matthias as a freethinker and straight-talker, everything I'm aware of that he's said or done in the two decades I've been around seems to come from altruistic intentions.
I know Matthias cares about the community. (He was very welcoming when I started, and we've discussed it over the years.) I think he'll want to personally investigate and consider what happened that resulted in alienating Matthew B., and try to correct any problems that he can.
This isn't just about Matthew B., but also about constantly seeing how we can be the best community for everyone. That's not a solved problem, and I suggest it's best approached as an ongoing process of humility, honesty, and support -- everyone feeling safe to raise concerns/problems, and everyone feeling safe to examine how we can improve.
> I think he'll want to personally investigate and consider what happened that resulted in alienating Matthew B., and try to correct any problems that he can.
Given MB's level of investment in Racket and its community, you'd expect that it would have been addressed in January, when he told the Racket team he was out. Whatever you think about Felleisen it seems pretty likely that he was aware before now and had already made up his mind not to address it.
If it clarifies anything, I suspect that, when he says "core team", he means something like the inner-circle of a few university researchers.
> In January 2020, I told two members of Racket’s core team t [...] They were always witnessed by others on the Racket core team.*
The inner-circle set is similar to that of Matthias and his grad students who started Racket (PLT Scheme).
Though the inner-circle is actively involved with the community, there's always been a definite separation.
So, the community would be oblivious to some things in the inner circle, and vice versa.
(BTW, that organizational dynamic might be evolving, including learning from Rust's evolution. Aaron Turon's talk at RacketCon, about Rust governance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1t4zGJYUuY )
I was at Aaron’s talk. I recall Matthias took particular offense to it. There doesn’t seem to have been any movement on governance for Racket in the intervening two years.
I think for all the innovation that gets attributed to Rust, the governance model is even more profound and will have longer term impacts in society. There really should be a documentary about Rust.
It does not matter one bit how he behaves towards you. What matters is how he behaves towards MB. Bullies are perfectly capable of treating you nicely while being nasty to somebody else. The serial killer next door might be a great neighbour to you. That doesn’t change the facts of what he is.
Most if not all responses here appear to target Matthias, however, it seems to me that author is also blaming Racket community for witnessing first hand the bullying and doing nothing. Tolerating Matthias alleged behavior is in a way condoning his abusive streak.
Speaking as someone was bullied throughout their entire chilohood: the part where everyone knows someone is a bully, knows that the other is the asshole but just shrugs off your suffering and tells you to endure it instead of trying to intervene, especially if these are people in a position of power, that part is much, much more hurtful and corrosive to being able to trust other humans than the actions of the bullies themselves.
I still get disproportionally upset by people in authority positions not taking responsibility due to lacking the basic decency to take responsibility. Because at the end of the day that's all it is, and all talk of this being a "complex" problem is lazy justification after the fact by cowards quieting their own small consciences.
Although not the same thing as adult bullying, adolescent bullying generally occurs in the presence of an audience (known as bystanders), and youths tend to rate bullies as more socially desirable than the bullied; even those who are bullied may think that bullies are more desirable.
That's a wonderful bit of trivia, but it also doesn't in any way excuse the spineless teachers who rather tell victims to endure daily abuse than confront a group of ten-year-olds
Perhaps the author was speaking of not wanting to be one of the people who he thought were aware of abusive behavior but weren't confronting it?
Or do you think the author thought that the community in general was aware of abusive behavior, and implicitly condoning it?
This evening, on this HN post, was the first I recall hearing of abusive behavior from MF, so I was surprised. I'd guess that the community would also be surprised, though I suppose the community might've changed in the couple years since I mostly left, or something relevant might've happened publicly there that I'm unaware of. (I left, or went on hiatus, for other reasons, nothing due to MF.)
For what it's worth (looking at some of the comments from people not very familiar), my own experiences with Matthias Felleisen have been positive. (I started contributing to what was then called PLT Scheme around 2000, have had lunch with him twice, and a few times over the years have had some mutually-candid conversations with him, about concerns affecting the project/community.)
While I might describe Matthias as a freethinker and straight-talker, everything I'm aware of that he's said or done in the two decades I've been around seems to come from altruistic intentions.
I know Matthias cares about the community. (He was very welcoming when I started, and we've discussed it over the years.) I think he'll want to personally investigate and consider what happened that resulted in alienating Matthew B., and try to correct any problems that he can.
This isn't just about Matthew B., but also about constantly seeing how we can be the best community for everyone. That's not a solved problem, and I suggest it's best approached as an ongoing process of humility, honesty, and support -- everyone feeling safe to raise concerns/problems, and everyone feeling safe to examine how we can improve.