You posted lower down asking to be called out for specific behaviour that people find objectionable.
This.
It’s complete nonsense that there is a conspiracy to kill v off. You know it. We know it. Saying it is just drama for the sake of drama.
> And the issues discussed are questionable at best. Half the article is about a type checker bug, which was a 3 line fix.
> Then false claims like being able to modify array.len.
This.
You’re just creating drama saying things like this.
Just say: “The issues in that review have been fixed now, please have a look and submit bugs in the issue tracker if you find them”.
If someone has a legitimate thing to say, and at the time they say it it’s valid… that’s fine. If was wrong at the time, then by all means call it out.
…but here’s the good story about v: you fix bugs. A lot. Quickly. You build lots of stuff. It’s very impressive.
Things aren’t always perfect; it’s v0.3 for goodness sake. It’s fine. Just a) don’t claim it’s perfect when it’s not, and b) just clearly point out when issues that have been raised are fixed.
I’m really sorry you feel that way; I honestly respect the work you do and I’m convinced you’re not correct about this… but hey; you’re deeper into it than me. Maybe there is? I don’t know.
…but, please also stop and read what I said.
You asked for specific examples where your interactions are causing problems.
this is it. Don’t post like this. You’re accusing people of attacking you, attacking other people (for example your comments on the author of Zig below).
This is what causes people to have bad interactions with you.
I think you don't fully understand or know of the scale of the attacks and trolling carried out by detractors and competitors. Which includes hiding what they do and their true purposes, and attempting to instigate and influence others to perpetuate attacks, drama, and smears for them. There is also the gaslighting whenever people recognize some of their actions, recognize their throwaway or troll accounts, or against attempts to call them out. This includes doing such on other websites, not just HN.
I don't know you, but I think you should PR-manage the situation without being confrontational. Writing a blog post about it just invites the trolls to write an answer!
Do you know how many "X is better than Rust", "X language is trash" articles are out there?
Just be passive-aggressive like "Hey! thank you for the bug report and for taking the time to make V a better language! We'll check these errors!". Dismiss them and go your road.
It's funny because in the previous discussion I got lots of "what's the problem? fix the bugs and publish your own post going through the points in this one".
I think it’s OK to write a blog post about your progress, with a positive attitude. A very different thing is to write a blog post refuting a troll. “Don’t feed the troll” is as old as the internet.
I sincerely hope you reconsider posting it. Even if you're a 100% right from your POV, it will still give off a negative energy and hurt your project. I think @wokwokwok has a good point, why not just focus on fixing bugs and building stuff instead?
Because these articles are meant to stay for years.
People will keep linking to them and say "didn't you see? V uses shell to do http requests! what a joke"
This most recent article by an anonymous author had all of the issues fixed within several days, but it wasn't updated, it'll stay like this forever, as planned.
I do understand that that must be frustrating. What I don't understand is why you think writing a blog post about it will have a positive effect on your project.
Hey.... even if people are attacking V-lang, don't worry. Any good thing that disrupts existing "kings" gets thrashed initially. That's human behavior. Ignore it.
But, if lead dev replies in ways that seems offensive, or attacking, that is something that actually creates permanent dent in the adoption. Even if you are right in saying what you are saying, it still matters, a lot, to be polite.
I'm someone who really really wants V to succeed. I love what rust is able to achieve, but not the complexity it brings. V-lang gives me what I want from a language.
Language is beautiful, now it's your turn to be the same. Ignore the trolls. Many of them are paid.
And best wishes.... keep the good work. It never goes in-vain.
You made that claim a couple of weeks ago, somebody investigated your claim, it turned out that you were grossly distorting the actual comment when paraphrasing. And given you continued to be active on that thread, you're clearly aware of this. Why continue spreading the lie? At this point you can't even claim it was an honest mistake.
Yes, it's very different. Xe is predicting that V will die in obscurity, and recommending that people ignore it due to that prediction. Look at the second half of that comment:
> There are good ideas there, but if you sell someone the moon and give them a block of cheese that's kind of a scam.
Xe says "There are good ideas there". What do you think the metaphor of being sold the moon and receiving a block of cheese was intended to express? What does it mean to you? To me, it very clearly expresses that the language described by V's marketing would be extremely valuable and desirable, and that Xe is disappointed that V does not live up to what they expected. It's bizarre to me that you somehow see this as consistent with "should die".
What is your evidence that there's a conspiracy? Why do you believe that people are secretly coordinating on secret plans to destroy you?
Everything I've seen is completely consistent with individuals disapproving of what they see as you repeatedly claiming that V is far more capable and ready than it actually is and ignoring others who point out their perception of the same exaggerations.
I'll be curious to read your upcoming blog post about this topic, as I have yet to see you describe any justification for your conspiracy claims besides you finding it implausible that people could actually disapprove of how you talk about your work.
The blog posts that you keep claiming are maliciously-motivated conspiracy seem entirely normal criticism to me. They describe their goals and motivations, and those goals and motivations seem like very normal and reasonable motivations that explain the content of the blog post. I don't see anything that would need speculated malicious conspiracy to explain it.
Creating a blog, with an obvious smear title like "V is Vaporware" and making comments like "I recommend against using it for anything...", is not "normal" criticism. That is attempting to go above and beyond, with drama and smearing.
To include following such blog posts up with more linking, smearing, drama posts, and attempts to use such to get more attention for one's self at the expense of the V language.
There are things that are actually vaporware. It is reasonable and normal for people to actually say when they believe that something has a lot of signs of being vaporware.
Are there really, truly no tools that you personally recommend against using?
> There actually is such a conspiracy. People who wrote these articles literally wrote they wanted V to die.
That's not a conspiracy[0], but a review[1]. You should be glad for the people that actually spend time to market your product, raise your credibility, tell you how you see from outside, and provide independent checks. For free.
We cannot know what the blog author was hoping for, we can only know what they wrote. And what they wrote is not anywhere near what amedvednikov repeatedly claims. Why are you ok with such blatant misrepresntation? If this conspiracy actually exists, isn't there some evidence that actually stands on its own rather than needing to be lied about?
It doesn't. But there's a more important point: you're paraphrasing somebody you clearly have a great deal of personal animosity toward, completely changing the meaning in the process, and with no indication that this is what's happening. You've continued doing that even when it's pointed out to you. There are two options I can see:
- You genuinely are not fluent enough in the language to either understand the original statement, or to write a fair paraphrase, and are not willing to believe this mistake.
- You know exactly what you're doing. That is, if you gave the actual quote, nobody would for a moment take it as a proof of your conspiracy claims.
Neither of the above is acting in good faith. I'd ask again whether you'll stop lying about what Xe said, but at this point the answer feels pretty obvious...
While wishing V would die is extreme, many people are just resentful about how V treated criticism in the beginning.
Not to mention that a conspiracy requires a coordinated effort. It's a lot more likely that blog writers are upset about something and decide to go on rants about other minutiae they find instead of submitting GitHub issues.
There are coordinated efforts on discords to brigade such threads, there are entire new accounts created just to reply to each of my comments negatively (luckily just today HN banned such an account), this very post about V 0.3 was mass flagged 3 times and removed from the front page 3 times, there are articles that take a simple bug fixed by a 3 line commit, and make a huge deal out of it spending a month writing an attacking post. Who would spend a month to write an article about a type checker bug?
> Who would spend a month to write an article about a type checker bug?
I have no horse in this race, have never heard of V, and frankly find the emotional charge in this comment section extraordinary... odd.
But I am a PL person.
Bugs in the type checker are pretty unambiguously a big deal. I totally understand why the examples in the blog post are alarming. The point isn't that they can be fixed by 3 lines; the point is that there were obvious soundness bugs in the type checker implementation and the language designer's attitude seems to be "NBD if the patch is small enough". Given the post and reaction, I would not be surprised if there are many more soundness bugs lurking. So, that's an issue if I want to use the language for anything serious.
That said, it looks like a hobby language in its early stages of approaching maturity, so the degree of divisiveness is seriously confusing. My reaction to all the drama is closer to "yup some soundness bugs; type systems get subtle fast, what a great thing to learn from" than "I hope V dies / the V critics are terrible".
I'm guessing there are weird personality/politics at play, but don't care enough to find out.
Simply, V is very divisive. So, some people who peruse HN but don't have an account will see a V post, and make an account just to comment. Humans are just irrational.
There's definitely trolls; I wasn't trying to imply otherwise. There's always going to be people who think your project is stupid, and it'll only get worse as the project grows. I think the best solution is to just ignore them.
I'll make a detailed post about this next week.