10 ms·

As a personnal note, you could feel that guido was already in this mood for a while from the tone of the last year tickets and mails. It's amazing he managed t

As a personnal note, you could feel that guido was already in this mood for a while from the tone of the last year tickets and mails. It's amazing he managed to not explode at somebody. I know i would have if our roles had been reversed in some exchanges we had. Good writers, comedians or directors know when to quit at the top their carreer. I think he is quitting before the situation was too taxing and that is wise and courageous. Espacially since it's been more than 2 decades of service. Plus he is leaving his baby. That's an amazing move.

Havoc 8y ago
>It's amazing he managed to not explode at somebody. Like a certain other BDFL occasionally does?
- IgorPartola 8y ago
  Don’t know why you are being downvoted. Linus’s tirades and diatribes are famous for how brutally personal they get. I still maintain that they are a waste of time and he would be a more effective leader if he limited his responses to “this is a bad idea” or “this isn’t done right” instead of writing pages long personal attacks on other members of the project.
  - raverbashing 8y ago
    > if he limited his responses to “this is a bad idea” or “this isn’t done right” And then people keep wasting his time insisting on a bad idea Cultural differences and all that. A good 'perkele' will be enough to get the point across in most cultures, even if some leave a bit disappointed.
    - gkya 8y ago
      It is easy to filter such people out. Especially if it is email the sole medium of contact.
      - yebyen 8y ago
        You want him to spend some of his time maintaining a block list of his professional volunteers that sometimes have bad ideas? How long do you stay on the list? And doesn't this assume that every idea that person has is bad? What happens when some good ideas are caught in the net? (And what happens when someone goes off and grabs help to implement the bad idea, because you weren't there anymore to tell them again not to do it that way? Or worse, what if they come around to your point of view, but can no longer reach you?) Wouldn't it be better to just say no, emphatically, and in a way that is clearly and unambiguously no? (I don't think it absolutely has to be a personal attack, but at least it's not passive-aggressively putting your ideas into a blackhole echo chamber...)
        gkya 8y ago
        I agree you, I assumed an incompetent/malevolent/sociopathic contributor that everybody would want to avoid. A toxic person that is. In the case you talk about, I think it's easy and effective to put forward one's thoughts with simple, clear language that's formal enough for the public mailing list of one of the most important open source projects on the world, in all of computing history. We tend to think in extremes: either be "PC with sugar-coated words" or insult people for their defects in public. No, there's a middleground where one can be an effective maintainer and still possess some humane virtues. Simple: you bring me some code, I find it dumb, idiotic, or what not; I have two options: I can tell you that the code is buggy/mistaken/&c and either reject it or request improvements (remembering also nobody, including me, is born an expert, and lives without mistakes); or I can tell you that you're dumb, tell you to fuck off, to shut the fuck up, and maybe insult your family. I'd guess you'd rather want to face the first way of communication. If a person can not communicate, they should not be a core developer of anything anyways. Teamwork is 80% communication and 20% actual technical work.
        yebyen 8y ago
        You don't say it out loud ("fuck off and die"), but when you exercise a block list, or mute or ban someone on a board, the net effect is the same. IMHO actually it's probably much worse. Sure, maybe egos are bruised, but nobody's contribution or community standing is actually harmed by "fuck off and die." A person who is banned, on the other hand, has no choice but to basically "fuck off and die." You think you're making the board more polite, but actually you just told that guy overtly through a policy enforcement action that his ideas or person are so bad that the ideas are not worth reviewing anymore. OK, I agree with you too, in principle at least, I would rather not be on the receiving end of the "fuck off and die" and I wholeheartedly agree there's a nicer way to say it. But I hope I'm being clear, that personally, I'd really have rather you just told me to fuck off and die. The block list was your idea now, and I think I want to dwell on it, because I don't agree with the premise that there are toxic people to merit the existence of a block list. > And then people keep wasting his time insisting on a bad idea You said it yourself, "one of the most important open source projects in the world" – Linus is much more successful than you or I, so we can afford to be charitable with our words and our time. I'll defer to reserve judgement on Linus because right now we're still talking about how you handle people with bad ideas. I want to say my feeling that you must not do it with a block list. The banned person is no longer able to provide any further benefit to the group. Maybe you have an actual toxic person and you find yourself in a position to ban them, ok go ahead and do it. I hope you won't misuse this authority to ban someone unfairly whose ideas are simply very bad. But let's say you ban someone and actually misjudged, and it wasn't really the person that was toxic, just the idea; the contributor with bad personality or ideas can probably still be rehabilitated in the group! But first they must admit their mistake, or at least receive a stern admonishment. So let's assume, charitably for Linus again, that it was actually a toxic idea that provoked the "fuck off and die." I prefer not to admit that there can be any toxic people until it's absolutely necessary. Maybe he is toxic. I am not in a position to ban, block, or kick him, (or anyone else,) from anything. So I'm not sure it could matter if I was to come to the conclusion that he was toxic personally, obviously you're free to argue that or not. All I'm saying is that once you admit that both people and ideas can be toxic, it's very easy to make this mistake. So I'd prefer to grant that people are not toxic as a rule until it's a proven fact that simply can't be discarded.
  - gsich 8y ago
    As an outsider: It's fun.
    - mindfulplay 8y ago
      Software construction shouldn't need this level of drama or comedy. It almost feels like hero worship.
      - ShabbosGoy 8y ago
        Or maybe Linus isn’t afraid to say what’s on his mind, and that’s why people respect him. You should try it some time. I know when I started doing it on here, my karma plummeted (real world analogue is “reputation” or social standing). But at least my conscience is clear.
        mindfulplay 8y ago
        There is a difference between speaking your mind vs berating or insulting people.
        watwut 8y ago
        He just said what was on him mind. Clearly and unambiguously.
      - vermilingua 8y ago
        Every other industry has “celebrities”, or otherwise popular/infamous professionals, why should software be any different; because it’s more pure?
      - znpy 8y ago
        This whole industry shouldn't need this level of drama or comedy.
        sonnyblarney 8y ago
        Drama and comedy can be fun, and it's human, after all. Toxicity is not good.
  - grosjona 8y ago
    I'm not familiar with these specific cases but I do think that many popular open source authors are extremely rigid and uncompromising. And yes, personal attacks against prospective contributors is a very harmful thing for the project. There are nicer ways to reject PRs and proposals that don't push away contributors. Also, I'm a firm believer that very talented people can make very silly mistakes sometimes so you can't assume that someone has no value for your project just because their work or idea was disappointing on a single occasion. When open source project leaders show aggression towards well-meaning people, it's a blatant display of arrogance and egomania.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    Being 'brutal' is sometimes ok if the brutality is more like 'exposing reality' in nature, and pointed at a situation, not at individuals. Personal attacks are totally counterproductive, demeaning, and just mean. When they are public, it's especially way out of bounds and I have no respect for someone who does that, it shows a lack of emotional maturity and confidence. There are definitely idiots in the world, but you don't go around calling them idiots, and certainly not in public. You don't even call their solutions 'idiotic'. You can say: "This approach is completely wrong, here's why and here are some alternatives" as a fairly callous-yet-acceptable response. Being unduly cold or callous shows a lack of diplomacy, and as Engineers sometimes we are all guilty of that a little bit, but being specifically derogatory is just bad. More on topic: congratulations to Guido for his contributions. None of us can never know how hard that was, and how much his contributions have helped so many. Bravo Zulu. I wish someone, in some respected 'institution', would give him some kind of medal, or the like.
  - flukus 8y ago
    Any example of being brutally personal? There's plenty where he attacks someone's work and mentions their position in the community but I don't think I've ever seen him get personal, like insulting their looks or background.
    - FartyMcFarter 8y ago
      https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/6/495 https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/6/495
      - flukus 8y ago
        There's nothing personal there, it's a generic insult. Unless Linus know's about the persons breastfeeding history of course. My understanding is that the person being derided here isn't even a kernel developer.
        okal 8y ago
        This is laughable. What would you consider a "personal" insult?
        flukus 8y ago
        Something personal to an individual, insulting their looks, background, family, etc. If you call me a dickhead it's not a personal insult, call me fat it's getting there and when it's that [redacted] event when I was drunk a few weeks ago it's personal. Anyone that find that Linus spray as "brutally personal" needs a cup of cement.
        jamienicol 8y ago
        There are plenty of people who don't like being called dickheads and choose not to work in those environments. I will never contribute a line of code upstream to the kernel, as will plenty more people who are much smarter than I am. You and Linus and all his fanboys will no doubt say the kernel is better off without us.
- reirob 8y ago
  Maybe this is the reason that the certain other BDFL is still in service? Maybe it's part of psycho-hygiene in order to be able to continue? I sincerely don't know - your question just triggered my experience when working in psychiatry and seeing how the staff was venting, talking and joking about patients - once the doors were closed. I was very shocked, was quite young, around 20 when serving - but one of the doctors, when she saw my shock, took me apart and explained that this behaviour, so shocking it might be when seeing it for the first time, is part of psycho-hygiene that allows the people to be able to continue to work and keep a certain distance. Sure, it's not the same, but I am questioning myself, if for these roles, like the BDFLs we are talking about, it is not necessary to have a personal way that allows to handle all the pressure, still keeping being yourself, defending your vision of your life-work.
  - DanBC 8y ago
    I work in patient safety in English MH settings. The culture you describe is toxic, and I would have reported all of those HCPs to their trust (using the trust complaints process), to the CQC, and possibly to their professional registration bodies. > is part of psycho-hygiene that allows the people to be able to continue to work and keep a certain distance. It's also a culture of de-humanisation that allows abuse to continue unchecked. You find this culture in every patient safety scandal: winterborne view, mid-staffs, morcambe bay, cornwall, etc etc.
    - sheepmullet 8y ago
      > The culture you describe is toxic How? Which parts exactly? > It's also a culture of de-humanisation Again, how? I find it creepy that without any specific examples provided you would report them. Surely that creates a toxic culture.
      - jf- 8y ago
        Belittling vulnerable people, behind closed doors or otherwise, is not a part of any healthy culture.
      - 8y ago
gmiller123456 8y ago
>Good writers, comedians or directors know when to quit at the top their carreer. Actually, no. I know this is getting away from the main point of the discussion a bit. But Adam Savage gave a good explanation as to why most paid people quit at the height of their career [1]. The idea is that once people pass their prime, the work they produce is worth less. So the only way such careers could continue would be for producers to overpay for a product, or for the actors to continue working just as hard for less money. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGeS6m3hVk8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGeS6m3hVk8

Havoc 8y ago

>It's amazing he managed to not explode at somebody. Like a certain other BDFL occasionally does?

IgorPartola 8y ago
Don’t know why you are being downvoted. Linus’s tirades and diatribes are famous for how brutally personal they get. I still maintain that they are a waste of time and he would be a more effective leader if he limited his responses to “this is a bad idea” or “this isn’t done right” instead of writing pages long personal attacks on other members of the project.
- raverbashing 8y ago
  > if he limited his responses to “this is a bad idea” or “this isn’t done right” And then people keep wasting his time insisting on a bad idea Cultural differences and all that. A good 'perkele' will be enough to get the point across in most cultures, even if some leave a bit disappointed.
  - gkya 8y ago
    It is easy to filter such people out. Especially if it is email the sole medium of contact.
    - yebyen 8y ago
      You want him to spend some of his time maintaining a block list of his professional volunteers that sometimes have bad ideas? How long do you stay on the list? And doesn't this assume that every idea that person has is bad? What happens when some good ideas are caught in the net? (And what happens when someone goes off and grabs help to implement the bad idea, because you weren't there anymore to tell them again not to do it that way? Or worse, what if they come around to your point of view, but can no longer reach you?) Wouldn't it be better to just say no, emphatically, and in a way that is clearly and unambiguously no? (I don't think it absolutely has to be a personal attack, but at least it's not passive-aggressively putting your ideas into a blackhole echo chamber...)
      - gkya 8y ago
        I agree you, I assumed an incompetent/malevolent/sociopathic contributor that everybody would want to avoid. A toxic person that is. In the case you talk about, I think it's easy and effective to put forward one's thoughts with simple, clear language that's formal enough for the public mailing list of one of the most important open source projects on the world, in all of computing history. We tend to think in extremes: either be "PC with sugar-coated words" or insult people for their defects in public. No, there's a middleground where one can be an effective maintainer and still possess some humane virtues. Simple: you bring me some code, I find it dumb, idiotic, or what not; I have two options: I can tell you that the code is buggy/mistaken/&c and either reject it or request improvements (remembering also nobody, including me, is born an expert, and lives without mistakes); or I can tell you that you're dumb, tell you to fuck off, to shut the fuck up, and maybe insult your family. I'd guess you'd rather want to face the first way of communication. If a person can not communicate, they should not be a core developer of anything anyways. Teamwork is 80% communication and 20% actual technical work.
        yebyen 8y ago
        You don't say it out loud ("fuck off and die"), but when you exercise a block list, or mute or ban someone on a board, the net effect is the same. IMHO actually it's probably much worse. Sure, maybe egos are bruised, but nobody's contribution or community standing is actually harmed by "fuck off and die." A person who is banned, on the other hand, has no choice but to basically "fuck off and die." You think you're making the board more polite, but actually you just told that guy overtly through a policy enforcement action that his ideas or person are so bad that the ideas are not worth reviewing anymore. OK, I agree with you too, in principle at least, I would rather not be on the receiving end of the "fuck off and die" and I wholeheartedly agree there's a nicer way to say it. But I hope I'm being clear, that personally, I'd really have rather you just told me to fuck off and die. The block list was your idea now, and I think I want to dwell on it, because I don't agree with the premise that there are toxic people to merit the existence of a block list. > And then people keep wasting his time insisting on a bad idea You said it yourself, "one of the most important open source projects in the world" – Linus is much more successful than you or I, so we can afford to be charitable with our words and our time. I'll defer to reserve judgement on Linus because right now we're still talking about how you handle people with bad ideas. I want to say my feeling that you must not do it with a block list. The banned person is no longer able to provide any further benefit to the group. Maybe you have an actual toxic person and you find yourself in a position to ban them, ok go ahead and do it. I hope you won't misuse this authority to ban someone unfairly whose ideas are simply very bad. But let's say you ban someone and actually misjudged, and it wasn't really the person that was toxic, just the idea; the contributor with bad personality or ideas can probably still be rehabilitated in the group! But first they must admit their mistake, or at least receive a stern admonishment. So let's assume, charitably for Linus again, that it was actually a toxic idea that provoked the "fuck off and die." I prefer not to admit that there can be any toxic people until it's absolutely necessary. Maybe he is toxic. I am not in a position to ban, block, or kick him, (or anyone else,) from anything. So I'm not sure it could matter if I was to come to the conclusion that he was toxic personally, obviously you're free to argue that or not. All I'm saying is that once you admit that both people and ideas can be toxic, it's very easy to make this mistake. So I'd prefer to grant that people are not toxic as a rule until it's a proven fact that simply can't be discarded.
- gsich 8y ago
  As an outsider: It's fun.
  - mindfulplay 8y ago
    Software construction shouldn't need this level of drama or comedy. It almost feels like hero worship.
    - ShabbosGoy 8y ago
      Or maybe Linus isn’t afraid to say what’s on his mind, and that’s why people respect him. You should try it some time. I know when I started doing it on here, my karma plummeted (real world analogue is “reputation” or social standing). But at least my conscience is clear.
      - mindfulplay 8y ago
        There is a difference between speaking your mind vs berating or insulting people.
      - watwut 8y ago
        He just said what was on him mind. Clearly and unambiguously.
    - vermilingua 8y ago
      Every other industry has “celebrities”, or otherwise popular/infamous professionals, why should software be any different; because it’s more pure?
    - znpy 8y ago
      This whole industry shouldn't need this level of drama or comedy.
      - sonnyblarney 8y ago
        Drama and comedy can be fun, and it's human, after all. Toxicity is not good.
- grosjona 8y ago
  I'm not familiar with these specific cases but I do think that many popular open source authors are extremely rigid and uncompromising. And yes, personal attacks against prospective contributors is a very harmful thing for the project. There are nicer ways to reject PRs and proposals that don't push away contributors. Also, I'm a firm believer that very talented people can make very silly mistakes sometimes so you can't assume that someone has no value for your project just because their work or idea was disappointing on a single occasion. When open source project leaders show aggression towards well-meaning people, it's a blatant display of arrogance and egomania.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  Being 'brutal' is sometimes ok if the brutality is more like 'exposing reality' in nature, and pointed at a situation, not at individuals. Personal attacks are totally counterproductive, demeaning, and just mean. When they are public, it's especially way out of bounds and I have no respect for someone who does that, it shows a lack of emotional maturity and confidence. There are definitely idiots in the world, but you don't go around calling them idiots, and certainly not in public. You don't even call their solutions 'idiotic'. You can say: "This approach is completely wrong, here's why and here are some alternatives" as a fairly callous-yet-acceptable response. Being unduly cold or callous shows a lack of diplomacy, and as Engineers sometimes we are all guilty of that a little bit, but being specifically derogatory is just bad. More on topic: congratulations to Guido for his contributions. None of us can never know how hard that was, and how much his contributions have helped so many. Bravo Zulu. I wish someone, in some respected 'institution', would give him some kind of medal, or the like.
- flukus 8y ago
  Any example of being brutally personal? There's plenty where he attacks someone's work and mentions their position in the community but I don't think I've ever seen him get personal, like insulting their looks or background.
  - FartyMcFarter 8y ago
    https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/6/495 https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/6/495
    - flukus 8y ago
      There's nothing personal there, it's a generic insult. Unless Linus know's about the persons breastfeeding history of course. My understanding is that the person being derided here isn't even a kernel developer.
      - okal 8y ago
        This is laughable. What would you consider a "personal" insult?
        flukus 8y ago
        Something personal to an individual, insulting their looks, background, family, etc. If you call me a dickhead it's not a personal insult, call me fat it's getting there and when it's that [redacted] event when I was drunk a few weeks ago it's personal. Anyone that find that Linus spray as "brutally personal" needs a cup of cement.
        jamienicol 8y ago
        There are plenty of people who don't like being called dickheads and choose not to work in those environments. I will never contribute a line of code upstream to the kernel, as will plenty more people who are much smarter than I am. You and Linus and all his fanboys will no doubt say the kernel is better off without us.
reirob 8y ago
Maybe this is the reason that the certain other BDFL is still in service? Maybe it's part of psycho-hygiene in order to be able to continue? I sincerely don't know - your question just triggered my experience when working in psychiatry and seeing how the staff was venting, talking and joking about patients - once the doors were closed. I was very shocked, was quite young, around 20 when serving - but one of the doctors, when she saw my shock, took me apart and explained that this behaviour, so shocking it might be when seeing it for the first time, is part of psycho-hygiene that allows the people to be able to continue to work and keep a certain distance. Sure, it's not the same, but I am questioning myself, if for these roles, like the BDFLs we are talking about, it is not necessary to have a personal way that allows to handle all the pressure, still keeping being yourself, defending your vision of your life-work.
- DanBC 8y ago
  I work in patient safety in English MH settings. The culture you describe is toxic, and I would have reported all of those HCPs to their trust (using the trust complaints process), to the CQC, and possibly to their professional registration bodies. > is part of psycho-hygiene that allows the people to be able to continue to work and keep a certain distance. It's also a culture of de-humanisation that allows abuse to continue unchecked. You find this culture in every patient safety scandal: winterborne view, mid-staffs, morcambe bay, cornwall, etc etc.
  - sheepmullet 8y ago
    > The culture you describe is toxic How? Which parts exactly? > It's also a culture of de-humanisation Again, how? I find it creepy that without any specific examples provided you would report them. Surely that creates a toxic culture.
    - jf- 8y ago
      Belittling vulnerable people, behind closed doors or otherwise, is not a part of any healthy culture.
    - 8y ago

gmiller123456 8y ago

>Good writers, comedians or directors know when to quit at the top their carreer. Actually, no. I know this is getting away from the main point of the discussion a bit. But Adam Savage gave a good explanation as to why most paid people quit at the height of their career [1]. The idea is that once people pass their prime, the work they produce is worth less. So the only way such careers could continue would be for producers to overpay for a product, or for the actors to continue working just as hard for less money. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGeS6m3hVk8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGeS6m3hVk8