I think there's a further reason why Linus' tone could be seen as reasonable in addition to those already outlined by the other replies. One of the criticisms t

I think there's a further reason why Linus' tone could be seen as reasonable in addition to those already outlined by the other replies. One of the criticisms these cases get is that Linus is effectively using his abrasive language to shut down discussion and enforce his point of view. However, that's exactly how the Linux kernel development is supposed to work, by design. Most discussions on the kernel mailing list are resolved long before they reach Linus and when contentious subjects do actually get to him, he is supposed to be the ultimate arbiter, the final check before something harmful (like the horrible idea he shuts down in this case) actually makes it into the kernel. In that role, I would argue that using strong, abrasive language to conclusively resolve an issue is exactly the right (as in, most efficient and likely to succeed) thing to do, and Linus has historically exercised very good judgment in resolving these situations. You can argue whether this development model is a good one, of course, but I think it's quite clear that it's working as intended, rather than these being random outbursts.