6 ms·

I refuse to tolerate assholes

144 points by taylorbuley 15y ago

p4bl0 15y ago
Thanks for saying it.
ericHosick 15y ago
Relevant book: The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn't - Robert I. Sutton. It provides an academic view of the subject.
- amyshelton 15y ago
  A most excellent book, indeed.
ericHosick 15y ago
I have similar feelings about this. There are billions of people on the earth and hundreds of millions of them are cool. So, why waste time with people who aren't nice when there are so many nice people to meet?
- pavel_lishin 15y ago
  Because maybe those many nice people couldn't program their way out of a wet paper sack. If I'm looking for someone to go to a bar with, I'll pick the nice person. If I need someone to help me complete a project at work, I'll probably try to find someone who's good at what they do, regardless of whether they're an asshole or not.
  - mestudent 15y ago
    You can do that but these people that act like jerks or asshole really do alienate and demotivate others, so while you might be able to handle them if you have a group of people an asshole can really destroy productivity.
    - pavel_lishin 15y ago
      That's very true, an asshole can wreck productivity. But we're human beings, and we excuse deficiencies in one area for excellence in another. If the asshole produces more than he destroys, it might be worth keeping him on board. ymmv, and all that, of course.
wccrawford 15y ago
Have you looked in the mirror, man? That entire posts exudes the exact same behavior you are condemning. You've asked for them to be fired? That wasn't your place, and the penalty is far too harsh for the crime. You were attempting to ruin their livelihood because you don't like them. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." - The Bible. Nobody would get to throw a stone. Nobody fits the criteria of being 'perfect'.
- ericb 15y ago
  I think the attitude you endorse just enables the assholism. Assholes ruin their own livelihood by being assholes, no need to blame the victims of their vitriol. For any given job, there are hundreds of other equally deserving candidates who aren't jerks. Getting fired gives assholes a chance to learn their behavior isn't acceptable, and is only fair to the more-deserving candidate who then fills the position.
  - sophacles 15y ago
    I think the reactionary ideals you promote enforce and enable sliminess. The person with the best presentation and fakest smile wins over any actual merit. You are actively endorsing the world of used-car salesmen, A&R reps, and so on, where substance and a solid stance are detrimental to success. Pathological extremes at both ends are still pathological, the correct response to an extreme is not its opposite, but a reasonable alternative.
    - awj 15y ago
      ...how did you make that leap? Where does "it should be possible for being a jerk to get you fired" lead to "enforcing and enabling sliminess"? It is entirely possible to hold a firm stance on what you think is the correct approach without being a jerk. It is equally possible to create a friendly atmosphere without acting like a used car salesman. I think you're reading more into the GP's statements than was intended.
      - mtoddh 15y ago
lelele 15y ago
Someone who contributes good code is by no means an asshole. Real assholes are selfish. Maybe some people are rude, that's it, but smart people see beyond rudeness.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
qjz 15y ago
These people behave in a way that would not be tolerated in real life. This statement is heavy with implications. Like many of us, the author abstracts these interactions into a second class version of reality, even though they are really happening. Why do people who are usually polite in person sometimes unleash an uglier, more confrontational side of themselves when there is a buffer of distance? Even before the introduction of email & chat, I've seen this happen in phone exchanges. In the absence of the need for a flight response, do we naturally tend to fall back to the fight response?
- erikig 15y ago
  I think this effect is exercerbated by the fact that it is difficult for users to discern tone in online modes of communication, unlike phone or face to face discussion (geeks in general have a hard time with either) I've been trying to ensure that I speak to people on the internets like I would if we were talking face to face.
epenn 15y ago
I'm typically very good at getting along with people, but I suppose my reaction to an asshole depends on the type of assholery being committed. Take for example someone who is egotistical and condescending. I may not necessarily like that person, but I can tolerate that person so long as the work being done is of good quality. On the other hand, take for example someone who takes credit for the work of others or in some other way actively seeks to step on his/her peers for personal gain. I have no tolerance for that.
- ben0x539 15y ago
  I think it might be worthwhile to consider the influence that the egoistical and condescending example person might have on someone who is not a perfectly rational actor, and possibly easily cowed into giving up on a technical discussion or retreating from the project as a whole. Sure, ideally all contributors to open-source projeccts are thick-skinned and confident enough that harsh condescendence will not affect them much, but in reality, they probably are not, and I would rather cater to them than to the "assholes" who might be scaring them away.
rauljara 15y ago
Preface: Something I've noticed about jerks/assholes: they're convinced that they're surrounded by jerks and/or assholes. Almost none of them are jerks for no reason. They're almost always jerks in response to some slight (either imagined, or blown way out of proportion). A good sign that you might be a jerk is that you see jerks all around you. Most people are basically all right. If you (1) run into conflicts with a lot of people, please consider the possibility that you are at least part of the cause. Actual Point: The reason I am hesitant about following the advice of this article is that it encourages you to divide the world into jerks and nice people. It's very easy to be a jerk to a jerk. If you are a jerk to a jerk, suddenly everyone on the project has to deal with two jerks. I do agree that there are behaviors that just shouldn't be accepted, and there are lots of examples of them online. But you (2) do need to be mindful of your response to those behaviors. Make sure your response isn't to engage in those behaviors yourself. (1 & 2) and by you, I mostly mean me. I am totally writing to myself here.
- yequalsx 15y ago
  Your last line was very nicely put. Something a jerk generally wouldn't say. I find that when I give advice to people often times it's more of a reminder to myself. I agree the world is not divided into jerks/nice people. There's a spectrum. Try to stay on the nice side. You can't always avoid jerks but one should not go out of their way to be around them.
  - adeaver 15y ago
    Not only that but there will be times, for whatever reason, a nice person will occasionally behave like a jerk. be it because something bad has happened at home or they are just having a bad day. Always a good idea to consider that the other person isn't having the same day/thoughts/experience as you.
    - jamesbkel 15y ago
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error I always try to give the benefit of the doubt. I can think of plenty of times where I only realize after the fact that I was distracted/in a bad mood and unduly acted rude towards someone.
keithwinstein 15y ago
This article really strikes a chord. In several nerd organizations at MIT, there are longstanding "assholes" who are brilliant people and whose contributions are very valuable and educational to other members, but who typically write acerbic and harsh messages. (Almost always their criticism is directed at other longtime members, not directly at new members, but even new members see these messages or interactions in person.) In the past, per longstanding MIT culture, these "assholes" were tolerated and their acerbic comments usually ignored -- meaning the "asshole" would send perhaps one acerbic contribution every 6-8 weeks to an otherwise busy mailing list. (Usually the assholes did not get in dust-ups with other assholes.) More recently, though, a new generation has decided not to tolerate the "assholes" and engages them publicly with every acerbic message, leading to huge flame wars that prove very distracting (because neither the asshole nor the altruist who engages them ever likes to give up). The organizations usually lack the will to actually expel the brilliant asshole, and it's not clear whether such a move would be in their best interests -- the asshole usually does make great contributions to the mission of the group, and I personally have learned a huge deal by engaging these people and picking their brains and sometimes recruiting them to join my projects because I know they will (and do) keep a sharp eye and tell us what we're doing wrong, and their commitment and level of effort toward a technical goal when they are on your team can be extraordinary. On the other hand, the asshole's acerbic contributions and criticism are doubtless offputting to some new members, even if not directed at them. I am not sure whether the new state of affairs is actually an improvement. I usually think it may be better just to tolerate the assholes, and I myself have a pretty thick skin about these things. I value the diversity of opinion and perspective and technical skill that comes from having a big tent, and by picking their brains and wealth of experience, I learned a great deal from the assholes. And these flamewars, some responsibility for which falls on the people who won't tolerate assholes, prove incredibly distracting. The people who adopt hard-line stances against tolerating assholes usually consider people like me -- (hopefully) non-assholes who nonetheless counsel caution and tolerance for the assholes -- to be terribly misguided and injurious to the long-term health of the organization. They make comments like, "I want to be in this organization with my friends, not people constantly criticizing me," which to my ears sounds possibly misguided -- you do not have to expect to be friends with everybody in an organization in order to work productively toward a shared goal. Often, the non-tolerators explain that while they themselves have thick skins, they are engaging the asshole on behalf of other, newer members who are not as willing to speak up but who are offended and repelled by the asshole. Are we just seeing the consequences of a new breed of the pampered "Generation Y" who have been raised to value civility above diversity of experience and raw merit? Or was the old way -- where harsh emails were merely ignored, while the group proceeded with its business -- just us having our heads in the sand, and unwelcoming enough to foreclose a whole crop of talented (but less thick-skinned) people from entering and flourishing in the group? Is this period of frequent flamewars likely to persist, or are we just seeing the temporary pains of a slow revolution as friendly and civil "millennials" replace the old guard? I really am not sure.
andreadallera 15y ago
I think you're confusing "asshole" with "socially awkward". The real assholes are the ones who smile and ooze kindness and would backstab you for 10 bucks. Usually the "grumpy" people you're talking about are just grumpy, but good-hearted in the end.
pavel_lishin 15y ago
> These people behave in a way that would not be tolerated in real life. I’ve worked with a few of these jerks in real life, and when they’ve been unable to restrain their behavior I’ve asked for them to be fired, and I’ve quit. Just because you couldn't tolerate them doesn't mean they aren't tolerated. When you asked for them to be fired (instead of asking the manager to talk to them about their behavior), were they actually fired? That sort of thing depends on the amount of power you hold in an organization. I certainly couldn't just demand that one of my coworkers be fired and expect my boss to acquiesce.
- erikpukinskis 15y ago
  If one of my coworkers was being abusive to anyone I would absolutely expect my boss to fire them. Edit: Or I would expect the boss to fire themselves for not being able to protect the team from the asshole.
  - absconditus 15y ago
    Should Steve Jobs be fired?
    - jeffh 15y ago
      Steve Jobs was fired ... and look what happened to Apple while he was gone. Good parallel? Probably not, but it isn't a unique situation.
      - rbanffy 15y ago
        There wasn't anyone nice to replace him. Having the company depend on one vital asshole is a worst-case scenario.
        pavel_lishin 15y ago
        I'd rather have a vital asshole, than be missing the vital component altogether.
MostAwesomeDude 15y ago
I can't comment directly on his blog. What kind of asshole doesn't let people comment on his blog? :3 (Sarcasm, by the way; I don't have comments on my blog either.) More pragmatically, the tolerance of assholes is a requisite for using a computer, if you know anything about who maintains your operating system. Linux, glibc, binutils, gcc, X; these are the underpinnings of your system, and they are all maintained by assholes of one kind or another. How do you propose to fix this?
- rbonvall 15y ago
  I don't have to deal with any asshole when I use gcc or whatever.
jorsh 15y ago
I refuse to tolerate grown men with flying pony backgrounds on their websites.
nowarninglabel 15y ago
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice. Another point, which the author could have also argued, is that assholes push or scare others out of open-source communities. Much of the time, the people scared away are not profilic contributors, however many of them had the potential to become so if they were nurtured. I certainly wasn't the best coder when I started contributing to Drupal (and I'm still not), but I managed to do a lot of good for it both in code and evangelizing for it. Had it not been for the leaders in the community who were super-nice (e.g., Neil Drumm and Angie Byron), then I would have let the jerks keep me from using and contributing back to something I loved. However, I noticed that as I became a better and more knowledgeable contributor, it was easier for me to fall into the behavior of sounding like a jerk myself. We (or at least I) have to constantly check ourselves to ensure we are doing good for the community and sticking true to our nice roots.
absconditus 15y ago
I am sure that there are at least half a dozen different definitions of "asshole" being used in these discussions making most commentary highly ambiguous.
- jbooth 15y ago
  HELMET: Who made that man a gunner? MAJOR: I did, sir. He's my cousin. HELMET: Who is he? SANDURZ: He's an Asshole, sir. HELMET: I know that. What's his name? SANDURZ: That is his name, sir. Asshole, Major Asshole. HELMET: And his cousin? SANDURZ: He's an Asshole, too, sir. Gunner's-mate, 1st Class, Philip Asshole. HELMET: How many Assholes we got on this ship, anyhow? ALL: Yo! HELMET: I knew it. I'm surrounded by Assholes. Keep firing, Assholes.
raganwald 15y ago
It's a gross oversimplification, but I try to live according to the dictum that it is easy to bifurcate behaviours into good and bad, but people are complex and subject to change, thus it is very difficult for me to brand someone as an "asshole." http://github.com/raganwald/homoiconic/blob/master/2009-05-01/optimism.md#readme http://github.com/raganwald/homoiconic/blob/master/2009-05-0... UPDATE: Thinking about the OP, I wonder if seeing behaviours as simple and people as complex actually helps you be intolerant of bad behaviour. If you believe that some people are assholes, you have very little in the way of options for dealing with them: Purge them from your life, wall them off so their damage can be contained, or accept them and their behaviour wholesale. But if you focus on the behaviour, you can try to negotiate: "You are a genius, your work on ___ is brilliant. However, this behaviour ____ is unacceptable, please stop doing it. Here is why..., Here is something more constructive you could consider..."
- jacobian 15y ago
  > But if you focus on the behaviour, you can try to negotiate: "You are a genius, your work on ___ is brilliant. However, this behaviour ____ is unacceptable, please stop doing it. Here is why..., Here is something more constructive you could consider..." Incredibly well said - that's the point I was reaching towards and couldn't quite articulate perfectly, apparently. Ideally, we'd call out shitty behavior and change that behavior. I didn't mean to suggest a "my way or the highway" attitude; rather, my point is that we shouldn't keep quiet when someone's being a jerk.
  - raganwald 15y ago
    Our words are in violent agreement. I wish more people would call my bad behaviour out.
  - Archaeum 15y ago
    Typically, I've managed to maintain a decent working relationship even with people others found virtually intolerable. My natural inclination is to let the more abrasive aspects of their personalities slide, but sometimes I doubt this approach, because occasionally what it means is taking them less seriously as human beings. Their idiosyncrasies can be predictable, so I'm tempted to think of them as machines. In one sense, it's convenient: I rarely get angry at machines, so why would I get angry at machine-like people? On the other hand, it's dismissive and lazy. What you're talking about is rejecting cynicism, assuming things can change, believing things are worth changing, and being willing to put in the effort to call out the jerks. As long as you do it constructively, you end up humanizing people who probably need it--and you might even make a difference! So, for all our sakes, please keep it up.
antoinevg 15y ago
Experienced programmers everywhere recommend: "/ignore"
- astrodust 15y ago
  /ban works better in my opinion. We're not so starved for talent we need to allow every asshole who can commit into a project.
jarin 15y ago
I do not tolerate working with assholes or having assholes working for me, but I am more than happy to let them work for someone else or on someone else's project and enjoy the fruits of their labor :)
AndyNemmity 15y ago
Assholes, are those people that write a compelling topic, but their webserver cannot handle the traffic?
Tharkun 15y ago
It's an old sore. And every once in a while someone bitches and moans about it. Big whoop. Pat yourself on the back for calling out anti-social behaviour. You made the world a better place. Now shut up and hack. Right? The thing about these arseholes is that they, just like you, are doing this on their own, because they enjoy doing it. They're giving up their time to create something that other people can use, usually without asking anything in return for it. What they can rightfully expect in return, though, is that people read the fucking manual or do a google search before they start their incessant questioning and bitching and nagging.
- kaitnieks 15y ago
  Sure, but calling someone who hasn't read the manual a moron takes more effort that shutting the fuck up. So either help the poor illiterate person or shut the fuck up. It's not like this person knows that there were 58 persons before with the very same question and then the next one will come and won't know that you just called this one a moron and ask the same question again, so you're not solving anything. Quick copy-paste of a link with the answer is a much better and easier solution, don't you think? I used to lead a community and those were my rules - help or keep silent; tolerate others. That's not so difficult, is it?
ryandvm 15y ago
Half-serious question: Why isn't being an asshole a clinically recognized disability? I have yet to meet a reformed asshole, so I've come to the conclusion that it's an inherent part of one's personality. No different than OCD, ADHD, sexual addiction, etc.
- rikthevik 15y ago
  > I have yet to meet a reformed asshole, so I've come to the conclusion that it's an inherent part of one's personality. I disagree. I've witnessed many people acquire empathy as they grow older and start treating others better. I know (hope) that I'm certainly not as impetuous or quick to judge as I was in my youth.
generators 15y ago
Every successful enterprise requires three men – a dreamer, a businessman, and a son-of-a-bitch. ( Every opensource project required three people. Linus. Jacob. Asshole. ( kidding... ( before you stop tolerating me ) ) yes. lisp. )
6ren 15y ago
An option is to reject their behaviour instead of rejecting them. Call them on it, objectively and matter-of-factly, instead of calling them names. Hard to do.
rennderdotcom 15y ago
I'm pretty sure working with an asshole just means that the person you are working with simply doesn't like you. It doesn't mean that they are an asshole to everyone, which in some cases they might be, but most of the time, I'm sure they just don't like you, for whatever reason. So what does that make you? A pushover? At the very least, it makes you someone who identifies other people's behavior, which pretty much makes you judgmental and fearful, and also, if you understand "the secret", it makes you someone who attracts assholes. Instead of "refusing to tolerate assholes", be an asshole right back and maybe they might respect you. Never push someone away just because you don't know how to interact with them, and that's the thing, you don't know how to interact with them, cause if you did, they would like you & respect you.
jacobian 15y ago
I think perhaps I haven't been clear enough, because most here seem to be missing what I intended to be my central argument; to quote: I will call out antisocial behavior, enforce professionalism in the communities where I have the power to do, and leave the communities that cannot at least offer civility. In other words, if someone's being a jerk, we should call them on it. I didn't mean to suggest dividing the world into "assholes" and "good people" — clearly there's a spectrum, and clearly even saints have bad days. And I certainly didn't mean we should ostracize people at the first sign of shitty behavior. But if someone's abusive, and they refuse to moderate their behavior, then either they need to leave or I will. I just can't accept that allowing abusive behavior is the price we have to pay for good code.
StefanKarpinski 15y ago
Yes, definitely, let's not tolerate assholes like RMS (almost unarguably an asshole) or Linus (arguably an asshole, although, I for one find his directness and lack of tact refreshing and amusing) in open source. So let's get rid of Linux and GNU and start over.
T_S_ 15y ago
I've worked with lots of these over the years. The really successful young ones were called enfant terribles. Sounds much nicer, non? My tolerance was in proportion to my paycheck, and I never saw management crack down unless they were heading off a discrimination case. Nowadays I work on a small startup. Hard computer problems are easier than simple people problems!
petercooper 15y ago
It's important to realize, however, that some people can be major assholes to you but charming to others. This disconnect can be pretty annoying but is something you have to get over because if you attack the "asshole" back and your friends like the asshole, you're going to look stupid.
RustyRussell 15y ago
The inflammatory title of my post did bleed through the content a bit, didn't it? I just loved the quote. Mea culpa. At some point, indeed, behaviour becomes so bad that you have a moral duty to stand up to it, even if it means burning your bridges on that project. Your examples in these comments fit the bill. But discovering that someone on the project is not a nice person, and someone you wouldn't want to hang out with? Even though they're a Coding Deity? I don't know if I'd work on any large FOSS projects if I drew the line there. Maybe your experience has been more pleasant, or your classification of assholes more sophisticated than mine :)
lhnz 15y ago
Nice to see a wave of contrary reactions to the original post, but I have to agree with him. And it's not because I think I can change an asshole. I probably can't. And perhaps sometimes I just add more to the flame. But in cases like this I follow the maxim: "Qui tacet consentire videtur." If you are silent and let this person behave badly then all others will see that this behaviour is in the realms of acceptableness to you and the group. For me, it is no different than allowing a bully to threaten a small kid in a school. We might have to tolerate this to have the most efficient workplace, but I prefer to optimize for justice. (I admit, in places where I steadfastly attempt to stick to this against the wills of the group, I am a jerk.)

144 points by taylorbuley 15y ago

p4bl0 15y ago

Thanks for saying it.

Relevant book: The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn't - Robert I. Sutton. It provides an academic view of the subject.

amyshelton 15y ago
A most excellent book, indeed.

ericHosick 15y ago

I have similar feelings about this. There are billions of people on the earth and hundreds of millions of them are cool. So, why waste time with people who aren't nice when there are so many nice people to meet?

pavel_lishin 15y ago
Because maybe those many nice people couldn't program their way out of a wet paper sack. If I'm looking for someone to go to a bar with, I'll pick the nice person. If I need someone to help me complete a project at work, I'll probably try to find someone who's good at what they do, regardless of whether they're an asshole or not.
- mestudent 15y ago
  You can do that but these people that act like jerks or asshole really do alienate and demotivate others, so while you might be able to handle them if you have a group of people an asshole can really destroy productivity.
  - pavel_lishin 15y ago
    That's very true, an asshole can wreck productivity. But we're human beings, and we excuse deficiencies in one area for excellence in another. If the asshole produces more than he destroys, it might be worth keeping him on board. ymmv, and all that, of course.

wccrawford 15y ago

Have you looked in the mirror, man? That entire posts exudes the exact same behavior you are condemning. You've asked for them to be fired? That wasn't your place, and the penalty is far too harsh for the crime. You were attempting to ruin their livelihood because you don't like them. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." - The Bible. Nobody would get to throw a stone. Nobody fits the criteria of being 'perfect'.

ericb 15y ago
I think the attitude you endorse just enables the assholism. Assholes ruin their own livelihood by being assholes, no need to blame the victims of their vitriol. For any given job, there are hundreds of other equally deserving candidates who aren't jerks. Getting fired gives assholes a chance to learn their behavior isn't acceptable, and is only fair to the more-deserving candidate who then fills the position.
- sophacles 15y ago
  I think the reactionary ideals you promote enforce and enable sliminess. The person with the best presentation and fakest smile wins over any actual merit. You are actively endorsing the world of used-car salesmen, A&R reps, and so on, where substance and a solid stance are detrimental to success. Pathological extremes at both ends are still pathological, the correct response to an extreme is not its opposite, but a reasonable alternative.
  - awj 15y ago
    ...how did you make that leap? Where does "it should be possible for being a jerk to get you fired" lead to "enforcing and enabling sliminess"? It is entirely possible to hold a firm stance on what you think is the correct approach without being a jerk. It is equally possible to create a friendly atmosphere without acting like a used car salesman. I think you're reading more into the GP's statements than was intended.
    - mtoddh 15y ago

lelele 15y ago

Someone who contributes good code is by no means an asshole. Real assholes are selfish. Maybe some people are rude, that's it, but smart people see beyond rudeness.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

qjz 15y ago

These people behave in a way that would not be tolerated in real life. This statement is heavy with implications. Like many of us, the author abstracts these interactions into a second class version of reality, even though they are really happening. Why do people who are usually polite in person sometimes unleash an uglier, more confrontational side of themselves when there is a buffer of distance? Even before the introduction of email & chat, I've seen this happen in phone exchanges. In the absence of the need for a flight response, do we naturally tend to fall back to the fight response?

erikig 15y ago
I think this effect is exercerbated by the fact that it is difficult for users to discern tone in online modes of communication, unlike phone or face to face discussion (geeks in general have a hard time with either) I've been trying to ensure that I speak to people on the internets like I would if we were talking face to face.

epenn 15y ago

I'm typically very good at getting along with people, but I suppose my reaction to an asshole depends on the type of assholery being committed. Take for example someone who is egotistical and condescending. I may not necessarily like that person, but I can tolerate that person so long as the work being done is of good quality. On the other hand, take for example someone who takes credit for the work of others or in some other way actively seeks to step on his/her peers for personal gain. I have no tolerance for that.

ben0x539 15y ago
I think it might be worthwhile to consider the influence that the egoistical and condescending example person might have on someone who is not a perfectly rational actor, and possibly easily cowed into giving up on a technical discussion or retreating from the project as a whole. Sure, ideally all contributors to open-source projeccts are thick-skinned and confident enough that harsh condescendence will not affect them much, but in reality, they probably are not, and I would rather cater to them than to the "assholes" who might be scaring them away.

rauljara 15y ago

Preface: Something I've noticed about jerks/assholes: they're convinced that they're surrounded by jerks and/or assholes. Almost none of them are jerks for no reason. They're almost always jerks in response to some slight (either imagined, or blown way out of proportion). A good sign that you might be a jerk is that you see jerks all around you. Most people are basically all right. If you (1) run into conflicts with a lot of people, please consider the possibility that you are at least part of the cause. Actual Point: The reason I am hesitant about following the advice of this article is that it encourages you to divide the world into jerks and nice people. It's very easy to be a jerk to a jerk. If you are a jerk to a jerk, suddenly everyone on the project has to deal with two jerks. I do agree that there are behaviors that just shouldn't be accepted, and there are lots of examples of them online. But you (2) do need to be mindful of your response to those behaviors. Make sure your response isn't to engage in those behaviors yourself. (1 & 2) and by you, I mostly mean me. I am totally writing to myself here.

yequalsx 15y ago
Your last line was very nicely put. Something a jerk generally wouldn't say. I find that when I give advice to people often times it's more of a reminder to myself. I agree the world is not divided into jerks/nice people. There's a spectrum. Try to stay on the nice side. You can't always avoid jerks but one should not go out of their way to be around them.
- adeaver 15y ago
  Not only that but there will be times, for whatever reason, a nice person will occasionally behave like a jerk. be it because something bad has happened at home or they are just having a bad day. Always a good idea to consider that the other person isn't having the same day/thoughts/experience as you.
  - jamesbkel 15y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error I always try to give the benefit of the doubt. I can think of plenty of times where I only realize after the fact that I was distracted/in a bad mood and unduly acted rude towards someone.

keithwinstein 15y ago

This article really strikes a chord. In several nerd organizations at MIT, there are longstanding "assholes" who are brilliant people and whose contributions are very valuable and educational to other members, but who typically write acerbic and harsh messages. (Almost always their criticism is directed at other longtime members, not directly at new members, but even new members see these messages or interactions in person.) In the past, per longstanding MIT culture, these "assholes" were tolerated and their acerbic comments usually ignored -- meaning the "asshole" would send perhaps one acerbic contribution every 6-8 weeks to an otherwise busy mailing list. (Usually the assholes did not get in dust-ups with other assholes.) More recently, though, a new generation has decided not to tolerate the "assholes" and engages them publicly with every acerbic message, leading to huge flame wars that prove very distracting (because neither the asshole nor the altruist who engages them ever likes to give up). The organizations usually lack the will to actually expel the brilliant asshole, and it's not clear whether such a move would be in their best interests -- the asshole usually does make great contributions to the mission of the group, and I personally have learned a huge deal by engaging these people and picking their brains and sometimes recruiting them to join my projects because I know they will (and do) keep a sharp eye and tell us what we're doing wrong, and their commitment and level of effort toward a technical goal when they are on your team can be extraordinary. On the other hand, the asshole's acerbic contributions and criticism are doubtless offputting to some new members, even if not directed at them. I am not sure whether the new state of affairs is actually an improvement. I usually think it may be better just to tolerate the assholes, and I myself have a pretty thick skin about these things. I value the diversity of opinion and perspective and technical skill that comes from having a big tent, and by picking their brains and wealth of experience, I learned a great deal from the assholes. And these flamewars, some responsibility for which falls on the people who won't tolerate assholes, prove incredibly distracting. The people who adopt hard-line stances against tolerating assholes usually consider people like me -- (hopefully) non-assholes who nonetheless counsel caution and tolerance for the assholes -- to be terribly misguided and injurious to the long-term health of the organization. They make comments like, "I want to be in this organization with my friends, not people constantly criticizing me," which to my ears sounds possibly misguided -- you do not have to expect to be friends with everybody in an organization in order to work productively toward a shared goal. Often, the non-tolerators explain that while they themselves have thick skins, they are engaging the asshole on behalf of other, newer members who are not as willing to speak up but who are offended and repelled by the asshole. Are we just seeing the consequences of a new breed of the pampered "Generation Y" who have been raised to value civility above diversity of experience and raw merit? Or was the old way -- where harsh emails were merely ignored, while the group proceeded with its business -- just us having our heads in the sand, and unwelcoming enough to foreclose a whole crop of talented (but less thick-skinned) people from entering and flourishing in the group? Is this period of frequent flamewars likely to persist, or are we just seeing the temporary pains of a slow revolution as friendly and civil "millennials" replace the old guard? I really am not sure.

andreadallera 15y ago

I think you're confusing "asshole" with "socially awkward". The real assholes are the ones who smile and ooze kindness and would backstab you for 10 bucks. Usually the "grumpy" people you're talking about are just grumpy, but good-hearted in the end.

pavel_lishin 15y ago

> These people behave in a way that would not be tolerated in real life. I’ve worked with a few of these jerks in real life, and when they’ve been unable to restrain their behavior I’ve asked for them to be fired, and I’ve quit. Just because you couldn't tolerate them doesn't mean they aren't tolerated. When you asked for them to be fired (instead of asking the manager to talk to them about their behavior), were they actually fired? That sort of thing depends on the amount of power you hold in an organization. I certainly couldn't just demand that one of my coworkers be fired and expect my boss to acquiesce.

erikpukinskis 15y ago
If one of my coworkers was being abusive to anyone I would absolutely expect my boss to fire them. Edit: Or I would expect the boss to fire themselves for not being able to protect the team from the asshole.
- absconditus 15y ago
  Should Steve Jobs be fired?
  - jeffh 15y ago
    Steve Jobs was fired ... and look what happened to Apple while he was gone. Good parallel? Probably not, but it isn't a unique situation.
    - rbanffy 15y ago
      There wasn't anyone nice to replace him. Having the company depend on one vital asshole is a worst-case scenario.
      - pavel_lishin 15y ago
        I'd rather have a vital asshole, than be missing the vital component altogether.

MostAwesomeDude 15y ago

I can't comment directly on his blog. What kind of asshole doesn't let people comment on his blog? :3 (Sarcasm, by the way; I don't have comments on my blog either.) More pragmatically, the tolerance of assholes is a requisite for using a computer, if you know anything about who maintains your operating system. Linux, glibc, binutils, gcc, X; these are the underpinnings of your system, and they are all maintained by assholes of one kind or another. How do you propose to fix this?

rbonvall 15y ago
I don't have to deal with any asshole when I use gcc or whatever.

jorsh 15y ago

I refuse to tolerate grown men with flying pony backgrounds on their websites.

nowarninglabel 15y ago

It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice. Another point, which the author could have also argued, is that assholes push or scare others out of open-source communities. Much of the time, the people scared away are not profilic contributors, however many of them had the potential to become so if they were nurtured. I certainly wasn't the best coder when I started contributing to Drupal (and I'm still not), but I managed to do a lot of good for it both in code and evangelizing for it. Had it not been for the leaders in the community who were super-nice (e.g., Neil Drumm and Angie Byron), then I would have let the jerks keep me from using and contributing back to something I loved. However, I noticed that as I became a better and more knowledgeable contributor, it was easier for me to fall into the behavior of sounding like a jerk myself. We (or at least I) have to constantly check ourselves to ensure we are doing good for the community and sticking true to our nice roots.

absconditus 15y ago

I am sure that there are at least half a dozen different definitions of "asshole" being used in these discussions making most commentary highly ambiguous.

jbooth 15y ago
HELMET: Who made that man a gunner? MAJOR: I did, sir. He's my cousin. HELMET: Who is he? SANDURZ: He's an Asshole, sir. HELMET: I know that. What's his name? SANDURZ: That is his name, sir. Asshole, Major Asshole. HELMET: And his cousin? SANDURZ: He's an Asshole, too, sir. Gunner's-mate, 1st Class, Philip Asshole. HELMET: How many Assholes we got on this ship, anyhow? ALL: Yo! HELMET: I knew it. I'm surrounded by Assholes. Keep firing, Assholes.

raganwald 15y ago

It's a gross oversimplification, but I try to live according to the dictum that it is easy to bifurcate behaviours into good and bad, but people are complex and subject to change, thus it is very difficult for me to brand someone as an "asshole." http://github.com/raganwald/homoiconic/blob/master/2009-05-01/optimism.md#readme http://github.com/raganwald/homoiconic/blob/master/2009-05-0... UPDATE: Thinking about the OP, I wonder if seeing behaviours as simple and people as complex actually helps you be intolerant of bad behaviour. If you believe that some people are assholes, you have very little in the way of options for dealing with them: Purge them from your life, wall them off so their damage can be contained, or accept them and their behaviour wholesale. But if you focus on the behaviour, you can try to negotiate: "You are a genius, your work on ___ is brilliant. However, this behaviour ____ is unacceptable, please stop doing it. Here is why..., Here is something more constructive you could consider..."

jacobian 15y ago
> But if you focus on the behaviour, you can try to negotiate: "You are a genius, your work on ___ is brilliant. However, this behaviour ____ is unacceptable, please stop doing it. Here is why..., Here is something more constructive you could consider..." Incredibly well said - that's the point I was reaching towards and couldn't quite articulate perfectly, apparently. Ideally, we'd call out shitty behavior and change that behavior. I didn't mean to suggest a "my way or the highway" attitude; rather, my point is that we shouldn't keep quiet when someone's being a jerk.
- raganwald 15y ago
  Our words are in violent agreement. I wish more people would call my bad behaviour out.
- Archaeum 15y ago
  Typically, I've managed to maintain a decent working relationship even with people others found virtually intolerable. My natural inclination is to let the more abrasive aspects of their personalities slide, but sometimes I doubt this approach, because occasionally what it means is taking them less seriously as human beings. Their idiosyncrasies can be predictable, so I'm tempted to think of them as machines. In one sense, it's convenient: I rarely get angry at machines, so why would I get angry at machine-like people? On the other hand, it's dismissive and lazy. What you're talking about is rejecting cynicism, assuming things can change, believing things are worth changing, and being willing to put in the effort to call out the jerks. As long as you do it constructively, you end up humanizing people who probably need it--and you might even make a difference! So, for all our sakes, please keep it up.

antoinevg 15y ago

Experienced programmers everywhere recommend: "/ignore"

astrodust 15y ago
/ban works better in my opinion. We're not so starved for talent we need to allow every asshole who can commit into a project.

jarin 15y ago

I do not tolerate working with assholes or having assholes working for me, but I am more than happy to let them work for someone else or on someone else's project and enjoy the fruits of their labor :)

AndyNemmity 15y ago

Assholes, are those people that write a compelling topic, but their webserver cannot handle the traffic?

Tharkun 15y ago

It's an old sore. And every once in a while someone bitches and moans about it. Big whoop. Pat yourself on the back for calling out anti-social behaviour. You made the world a better place. Now shut up and hack. Right? The thing about these arseholes is that they, just like you, are doing this on their own, because they enjoy doing it. They're giving up their time to create something that other people can use, usually without asking anything in return for it. What they can rightfully expect in return, though, is that people read the fucking manual or do a google search before they start their incessant questioning and bitching and nagging.

kaitnieks 15y ago
Sure, but calling someone who hasn't read the manual a moron takes more effort that shutting the fuck up. So either help the poor illiterate person or shut the fuck up. It's not like this person knows that there were 58 persons before with the very same question and then the next one will come and won't know that you just called this one a moron and ask the same question again, so you're not solving anything. Quick copy-paste of a link with the answer is a much better and easier solution, don't you think? I used to lead a community and those were my rules - help or keep silent; tolerate others. That's not so difficult, is it?

ryandvm 15y ago

Half-serious question: Why isn't being an asshole a clinically recognized disability? I have yet to meet a reformed asshole, so I've come to the conclusion that it's an inherent part of one's personality. No different than OCD, ADHD, sexual addiction, etc.

rikthevik 15y ago
> I have yet to meet a reformed asshole, so I've come to the conclusion that it's an inherent part of one's personality. I disagree. I've witnessed many people acquire empathy as they grow older and start treating others better. I know (hope) that I'm certainly not as impetuous or quick to judge as I was in my youth.

generators 15y ago

Every successful enterprise requires three men – a dreamer, a businessman, and a son-of-a-bitch. ( Every opensource project required three people. Linus. Jacob. Asshole. ( kidding... ( before you stop tolerating me ) ) yes. lisp. )

6ren 15y ago

An option is to reject their behaviour instead of rejecting them. Call them on it, objectively and matter-of-factly, instead of calling them names. Hard to do.

rennderdotcom 15y ago

I'm pretty sure working with an asshole just means that the person you are working with simply doesn't like you. It doesn't mean that they are an asshole to everyone, which in some cases they might be, but most of the time, I'm sure they just don't like you, for whatever reason. So what does that make you? A pushover? At the very least, it makes you someone who identifies other people's behavior, which pretty much makes you judgmental and fearful, and also, if you understand "the secret", it makes you someone who attracts assholes. Instead of "refusing to tolerate assholes", be an asshole right back and maybe they might respect you. Never push someone away just because you don't know how to interact with them, and that's the thing, you don't know how to interact with them, cause if you did, they would like you & respect you.

jacobian 15y ago

I think perhaps I haven't been clear enough, because most here seem to be missing what I intended to be my central argument; to quote: I will call out antisocial behavior, enforce professionalism in the communities where I have the power to do, and leave the communities that cannot at least offer civility. In other words, if someone's being a jerk, we should call them on it. I didn't mean to suggest dividing the world into "assholes" and "good people" — clearly there's a spectrum, and clearly even saints have bad days. And I certainly didn't mean we should ostracize people at the first sign of shitty behavior. But if someone's abusive, and they refuse to moderate their behavior, then either they need to leave or I will. I just can't accept that allowing abusive behavior is the price we have to pay for good code.

StefanKarpinski 15y ago

Yes, definitely, let's not tolerate assholes like RMS (almost unarguably an asshole) or Linus (arguably an asshole, although, I for one find his directness and lack of tact refreshing and amusing) in open source. So let's get rid of Linux and GNU and start over.

T_S_ 15y ago

I've worked with lots of these over the years. The really successful young ones were called enfant terribles. Sounds much nicer, non? My tolerance was in proportion to my paycheck, and I never saw management crack down unless they were heading off a discrimination case. Nowadays I work on a small startup. Hard computer problems are easier than simple people problems!

petercooper 15y ago

It's important to realize, however, that some people can be major assholes to you but charming to others. This disconnect can be pretty annoying but is something you have to get over because if you attack the "asshole" back and your friends like the asshole, you're going to look stupid.

RustyRussell 15y ago

The inflammatory title of my post did bleed through the content a bit, didn't it? I just loved the quote. Mea culpa. At some point, indeed, behaviour becomes so bad that you have a moral duty to stand up to it, even if it means burning your bridges on that project. Your examples in these comments fit the bill. But discovering that someone on the project is not a nice person, and someone you wouldn't want to hang out with? Even though they're a Coding Deity? I don't know if I'd work on any large FOSS projects if I drew the line there. Maybe your experience has been more pleasant, or your classification of assholes more sophisticated than mine :)

lhnz 15y ago

Nice to see a wave of contrary reactions to the original post, but I have to agree with him. And it's not because I think I can change an asshole. I probably can't. And perhaps sometimes I just add more to the flame. But in cases like this I follow the maxim: "Qui tacet consentire videtur." If you are silent and let this person behave badly then all others will see that this behaviour is in the realms of acceptableness to you and the group. For me, it is no different than allowing a bully to threaten a small kid in a school. We might have to tolerate this to have the most efficient workplace, but I prefer to optimize for justice. (I admit, in places where I steadfastly attempt to stick to this against the wills of the group, I am a jerk.)