This was indeed a very interesting talk to watch. I was especially intrigued by the idea that the guidance towards purpose of a community (and its places of discussion and interaction) provide a more streamlined place of interaction that can become more friendly and more focused on resolution and understanding, instead of discussion and convincing others.
I also liked some of the more “realistic” solutions presented in communication tools that can help with this. During the talk I had to think about Rust’s focus on tooling surrounding the language and surrounding the processes created to advance the language (bors, high-five, crater, clippy, etc), these tools were specifically created to solve a problem. But then you look at the community, and the tooling surrounging it (or, us), and we fall back to “off the shelf” solutions such as Discourse, Discord, IRC, GitHub Issues, etc. It makes me wonder if missed some opportunities there, or – looking forward instead of backward– I wonder if there are many benefits to be gained by spending a large amount of community effort towards building more tooling and processes to help the community become better at communicating by giving more (automated) guidance, creating/forcing more nuance in our discussion tools, and creating “anti-nudging” help specifically to fight against the issues discussed in this video.
Anyway, sorry for the long “rant”, but this really struck a chord with me, and as much as I really like the Rust community and the explicit effort of the Rust team to make this an open and welcoming community, I also realize maintaining such a community is hard work, so if there is anything we can do to make that work even a little bit easier, I think that is work well spent.