If you need an example of the rust community being toxic, I give you https://github.com/actix/actix-web
Look up the history and realize they bullied an open source project leader into leaving open source for good.
I still don't understand the relevance, this neither appears toxic nor to be a discussion of Rust; this looks like they put forward an out-there idea and you didn't care for it, which just seems like a discussion about consumer protection laws. I also don't see the connection from Actix drama to the idea that people are exaggerating the capabilities of Rust or causing problems for other language communities - I don't know much about it, I'm fully willing to believe toxicity was involved, but a breakdown in communication between a maintainer and their community doesn't seem like the behavior we're discussing and I don't see any evidence this was peculiar to Rust and not a phenomenon in open source at large.
I don't want to relitigate some thread I wasn't even a part of, I just don't understand.
My understanding is that negative votes is for things that don’t contribute to discussion, yet all my comments are in the negatives except when I mentioned I actually am using rust. Then suddenly the commenter stops talking about our discussion all together and starts to mention learning rust.
It’s frustrating because I like rust, but I can’t seem to criticize it in the slightest.
After saying everyone was empowered to use their tool, they tried to kick someone off the team for working for Palantir.
Regardless of politics, kinda unfair to make political statements using the rust accounts, then turn around and say other people can’t be part of rust because they work for a company who is political.