4 ms·

you just don't get it. you're still stuck on the notion of "socially inacceptable behaviour". the whole point here is that the standard by which you judge "soci

you just don't get it. you're still stuck on the notion of "socially inacceptable behaviour". the whole point here is that the standard by which you judge "socially acceptable" is broken and detrimental to the community. Linus behavior is socially acceptable. He is honest, passionate, says what he means, and most importantly, he is forgiving and doesn't hold grudges. The type of behavior that Linus is railing against here is the politically correct culture of insipid office politics, forced politeness, and concealing the true meaning of communications in order to make the communication a more effective tool of political manipulation. this encourages duplicity, causes people to become disengaged from the work and obsessed with their political relationship to their coworkers, and it breeds long lasting unacknowledged and unforgiven grudges. its a horror show. but you consider it "socially acceptable" because it matches your standard of politeness for some reason.

justin66 13y ago
> this encourages duplicity, causes people to become disengaged from the work and obsessed with their political relationship to their coworkers, and it breeds long lasting unacknowledged and unforgiven grudges. Does anyone familiar with it think the Linux kernel development community has successfully avoided all that? Not Linus himself, but the community he leads and whose norms he helps set?
olalonde 13y ago
This is a false dichotomy. There's a happy middle ground between being rude and playing insipid office politics. It's called politeness and doesn't have to make communications less effective or less honest.
- metaphorm 13y ago
  its not a false dichotomy. sometimes tone IS content. if a person did something that you consider to be such a bad error that you wish them to hear your deep concern/annoyance then it is correct to be "rude", or rather to use harsh language and avoid sugar coating. Linus exemplifies this style of communication.
  - DanBC 13y ago
    > rather to use harsh language and avoid sugar coating. It is tedious when people keep saying that "avoiding sugar coating" means "be rude". It is fine to avoid sugar coating something. It's not fine to be rude. > such a bad error that you wish them to hear your deep concern/annoyance There are many ways to express deep concern or annoyance without being rude, and without sugar coating something. "It is very frustrating to me that I have to check so much of your work. Please take extra-special care next time you commit something. Here are the errors you've made so far. This has involved a lot of extra work, and has distracted me from doing other work. This is not the first time you've made these simple mistakes. We appreciate your effort, but it might be better if you worked on $OTHER_THING rather than $THIS_THING until you understand our requirements." That is professional, harsh, true, constructive, and gets stuff done. It's not sugar coated. It's also not rude.

justin66 13y ago

> this encourages duplicity, causes people to become disengaged from the work and obsessed with their political relationship to their coworkers, and it breeds long lasting unacknowledged and unforgiven grudges. Does anyone familiar with it think the Linux kernel development community has successfully avoided all that? Not Linus himself, but the community he leads and whose norms he helps set?

olalonde 13y ago

This is a false dichotomy. There's a happy middle ground between being rude and playing insipid office politics. It's called politeness and doesn't have to make communications less effective or less honest.

metaphorm 13y ago
its not a false dichotomy. sometimes tone IS content. if a person did something that you consider to be such a bad error that you wish them to hear your deep concern/annoyance then it is correct to be "rude", or rather to use harsh language and avoid sugar coating. Linus exemplifies this style of communication.
- DanBC 13y ago
  > rather to use harsh language and avoid sugar coating. It is tedious when people keep saying that "avoiding sugar coating" means "be rude". It is fine to avoid sugar coating something. It's not fine to be rude. > such a bad error that you wish them to hear your deep concern/annoyance There are many ways to express deep concern or annoyance without being rude, and without sugar coating something. "It is very frustrating to me that I have to check so much of your work. Please take extra-special care next time you commit something. Here are the errors you've made so far. This has involved a lot of extra work, and has distracted me from doing other work. This is not the first time you've made these simple mistakes. We appreciate your effort, but it might be better if you worked on $OTHER_THING rather than $THIS_THING until you understand our requirements." That is professional, harsh, true, constructive, and gets stuff done. It's not sugar coated. It's also not rude.