6 ms·

I understand her viewpoint... But I read Linus e-mail explaining his attitude, and I am more inclined to agree with him instead. I am one that sometimes peopl

by speeder 13y ago

I understand her viewpoint... But I read Linus e-mail explaining his attitude, and I am more inclined to agree with him instead. I am one that sometimes people called caustic or whatnot, including in my current startup, no matter how much I made a great effort to be polite and make clear I was not attacking anyone, every time I said the artist did something wrong, he would get pissed off and offended. After a while I gave up, and started to write in my usual "caustic looking" style, and the artist started to understand me more, make less mistakes, and now we can make jokes and work with other without issues. I personally hate the "corporate" style culture of being passive agressive, avoiding confrontations, being polite all the times and whatnot. If you annoys me, I will tell you that you annoy me, and if you insist, I will throw a "fuck you". I remember how much I hated every environment that I was, where "verbal abuse" was curtailed, because I never knew if someone was saying the truth or not, and in the end I started to behave like if everyone was a serial liar, and when you cannot trust anyone, it is hard to get anything done.

14113 13y ago
As someone who (I don't think) has any form of autism, or asbergers I still find it difficult to parse the intent behind overly polite messages, or those that try and avoid confrontation. I'd very much prefer to have messages that were particularly vicious, as it'd make the intent far clearer to me.
anuragramdasan 13y ago
I totally agree. I believe if I can throw a "fuck you" at you and you can take it without creating much of a fuss, it'll just be easier for me to pick out your mistakes right up without resorting to fake politeness. And you could do the same. This would only make it easier to get things done. Also who doesn't like to get things done their way, when its their own project? Also I can't help but agree to Linus' response mail.
- EliRivers 13y ago
  Why does it have to be fake politeness? Why can't we have real politeness?
  - anuragramdasan 13y ago
    Not everyone is wired the same way right? Linus is being his way. If you are a polite person, you are not expected to swear around. Be polite and that'd be wonderful. The same goes for those who just aren't polite. Why expect them to fake it? Let them be themselves.
  - gyom 13y ago
    That's an interesting question. Maybe all politeness is fake to some degree (you're interfacing with someone by being nice regardless of what that person does), but we say "fake politeness" when you're spending a lot of energy to keep the politeness filter on. Tell me if you have a theory about real vs fake politeness.
HarryHirsch 13y ago
If I had the choice between Linus' abrasive style and the fake politeness in Wikipedialand, where you can needle and provoke your enemy at will provided you don't use rude words I pick Linus a thousand times over. Linus knows what a colleague is, and Wikipedia doesn't - over there they have enemies, not opponents. The headline calls it "verbal abuse", but they don't seem to have a grasp what abuse is.
- jusben1369 13y ago
  Sure. I'll just take a third option though where people are direct but not abusive. Doesn't seem like too much to wish for.
- knowtheory 13y ago
  Presumably you've heard the phrase that "we can disagree without being disagreeable". I agree that I would much rather work with Linus than Wikipedians, but I'd also prefer working with people who I trust to give me their honest opinion without a needless verbal shelacking. You could also ask me if i'd prefer to have my hand or my foot cut off (foot for the record), but personally my preference is to find a way to keep all of my limbs intact. The point over which I absolutely support Sarah Sharp is that what Linus is doing is essentially hazing. He's trying to enforce societal norms by handing out verbal beatings, and trying to encourage others to enforce his norms via his methods. That is a problem. Tart replies regarding criticism of code, or how code is managed is one thing. Trying to encourage a culture of verbal abuse is entirely another. ------------------------------------ Sidebar: There are organizations that do work these sorts of verbal dressing downs as a systematic tactic. The Marines are famous for it. The objective is to provide shared hardship to encourage bonding amongst a group of trainees. They're also famous for fucking it up (so much so that we've got films like Full Metal Jacket to memorialize the experience). But FOSS and Kernel contribution is not like the Marines. There is no inherent unit of social support to fall into. If you're lucky enough to be part of a group, or to have someone say "oh yeah, that's how Linus is" then maybe you get over it and inure yourself to the abuse. Or maybe you just stop contributing to the Kernel.
  - jessaustin 13y ago
Delmania 13y ago
Swearing is not a problem. In fact, people who swear tend to be more honest than those who don't. You don't have to be polite, you don't have to avoid confrontations. What you have to be is respectful. You should never attack a person, you should attack their actions. But only after you understand.
- eksith 13y ago
  > In fact, people who swear tend to be more honest than those who don't [citation needed] There's a whole lot of context involved here. Yes, there are very honest people who curse like sailors (fishermen especially [1]), likewise there are honest people who wouldn't throw about farthing filth about fornication willy-nilly[2]. I would add that ideas, in addition to actions, are fair game. [1] Deadliest Catch [2] Ex-Mormon colleague
  - ZoF 13y ago
    Your sources are a TV show and an ex-mormon?
    - eksith 13y ago
      The TV show was cheek. The ex-Mormon, I've known for 12 years.
- daemon13 13y ago
  Which is what Linus did...
codyb 13y ago
Is it not possible to both be, perhaps stern and clear in view without being abrasive? "Hey John, thanks for contributing. I see you updated X. There's a lot of good there but this algorithm really needs to run faster and use less memory. Check out how Sarah did it here when working with Y. Additionally, here's some resources. Thanks."
- 14113 13y ago
  That implies that it's ok. I would prefer: "Hey john, thanks for the contribution though, but it's not good enough - it's currently too slow and hogs too much memory. As an example of how it should be running see sarah's Y."
  - codyb 13y ago
    That would be the case I suppose if John's entire contribution was poor. I was thinking perhaps there might be some part of John's contribution that was actually quality and to say "hey, you know you're doing good work, it's just this part that isn't working well". Obviously we're dealing in hypotheticals here and I guess if it is the case that none of John's code works well then your approach is probably the only decent approach. If there is some code of John's that does work well than I find a lot of times it's easier to give a little compliment prior to your criticism just so they know that yes, we do appreciate your work and contributions, but in order to be more effective here is what you have to do.
  - andyjohnson0 13y ago
    Have you ever managed or lead a team? If you have, you'll know that your job in that situation is to get the best results from the team - over a variety of time-scales. Sometimes you have to crack the whip, but mostly its important to be somewhat diplomatic and respectful while still being clear and direct, because the team is made of people who (unless it has some kind of dysfunctional brogramming-type culture) have a need for fulfilment in the work they're doing. Some cultures are more direct (eg. Dutch, Israeli, Finnish) than others (eg. Japan). If everyone on a team expects the same norms then they are going to get along well. The problem for Linus is that the "team" is a pan-cultural community with a spread of norms and (it seems to me) that Linus want to be the Linux benevolent-dictator-for-life while everyone else expects him to be a leader.
stackcollision 13y ago
'Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untraveled, the naïve, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as "empty," "meaningless," or "dishonest," and scorn to use them. No matter how "pure" their motives, they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at best.'
- icesoldier 13y ago
  I know I've seen that quote before, but I forget where.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
jccc 13y ago
I personally hate the "corporate" style culture of being passive agressive, avoiding confrontations, being polite all the times and whatnot. Agreed. If only that were what she's talking about: To me, being "professional" means treating each other with respect. I can show emotion, express displeasure, be direct, and still show respect for my fellow developers. For example, I find the following statement to be both direct and respectful, because it's criticizing code, not the person: "This code is SHIT! It adds new warnings and it's marked for stable when it's clearly *crap code* that's not a bug fix. I'm going to revert this merge, and I expect a fix from you IMMEDIATELY." https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/18/340 https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/18/340 We're adults, not high schoolers. We can figure out how to deliver harsh technical criticism without resorting to name calling, cussing at people, or personal attacks. https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/16/554 https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/16/554 You are in a position of power. Stop verbally abusing your developers. https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/15/427 https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/15/427
pessimizer 13y ago
When it comes to fuck yous, I hate them because they don't communicate anything, although combined with a foreknowledge of the person's impulse control abilities you might be able to figure out their emotional state (which I usually don't care about.) It's just abuse, and if we're going to abuse each other with no content, I might as well punch you, which is fun. Swear words are often just more shit to wade through to get to content. Sweary people like to direct their frustration outwards, but that doesn't necessarily make them direct. I see little relationship between people who throw hissyfits and people who are honest in the way I like. The honesty I like cuts down the search space for reaching pragmatic solutions; it doesn't simply tell me that Billy's blood sugar is getting low.
chalst 13y ago
If interpreted correctly Linus' remarks about the value of having a panel discussion on the issues Sarah raised, he does think it might be possible to find an accomodation on lkml that suits both him and Sarah. Sarah was not passive aggressive, and she did the opposite of avoid confrontation on this matter. It seems odd to me that she is accused of wanting these aspects of corporate style.

by speeder 13y ago

14113 13y ago

As someone who (I don't think) has any form of autism, or asbergers I still find it difficult to parse the intent behind overly polite messages, or those that try and avoid confrontation. I'd very much prefer to have messages that were particularly vicious, as it'd make the intent far clearer to me.

anuragramdasan 13y ago

I totally agree. I believe if I can throw a "fuck you" at you and you can take it without creating much of a fuss, it'll just be easier for me to pick out your mistakes right up without resorting to fake politeness. And you could do the same. This would only make it easier to get things done. Also who doesn't like to get things done their way, when its their own project? Also I can't help but agree to Linus' response mail.

EliRivers 13y ago
Why does it have to be fake politeness? Why can't we have real politeness?
- anuragramdasan 13y ago
  Not everyone is wired the same way right? Linus is being his way. If you are a polite person, you are not expected to swear around. Be polite and that'd be wonderful. The same goes for those who just aren't polite. Why expect them to fake it? Let them be themselves.
- gyom 13y ago
  That's an interesting question. Maybe all politeness is fake to some degree (you're interfacing with someone by being nice regardless of what that person does), but we say "fake politeness" when you're spending a lot of energy to keep the politeness filter on. Tell me if you have a theory about real vs fake politeness.

HarryHirsch 13y ago

If I had the choice between Linus' abrasive style and the fake politeness in Wikipedialand, where you can needle and provoke your enemy at will provided you don't use rude words I pick Linus a thousand times over. Linus knows what a colleague is, and Wikipedia doesn't - over there they have enemies, not opponents. The headline calls it "verbal abuse", but they don't seem to have a grasp what abuse is.

jusben1369 13y ago
Sure. I'll just take a third option though where people are direct but not abusive. Doesn't seem like too much to wish for.
knowtheory 13y ago
Presumably you've heard the phrase that "we can disagree without being disagreeable". I agree that I would much rather work with Linus than Wikipedians, but I'd also prefer working with people who I trust to give me their honest opinion without a needless verbal shelacking. You could also ask me if i'd prefer to have my hand or my foot cut off (foot for the record), but personally my preference is to find a way to keep all of my limbs intact. The point over which I absolutely support Sarah Sharp is that what Linus is doing is essentially hazing. He's trying to enforce societal norms by handing out verbal beatings, and trying to encourage others to enforce his norms via his methods. That is a problem. Tart replies regarding criticism of code, or how code is managed is one thing. Trying to encourage a culture of verbal abuse is entirely another. ------------------------------------ Sidebar: There are organizations that do work these sorts of verbal dressing downs as a systematic tactic. The Marines are famous for it. The objective is to provide shared hardship to encourage bonding amongst a group of trainees. They're also famous for fucking it up (so much so that we've got films like Full Metal Jacket to memorialize the experience). But FOSS and Kernel contribution is not like the Marines. There is no inherent unit of social support to fall into. If you're lucky enough to be part of a group, or to have someone say "oh yeah, that's how Linus is" then maybe you get over it and inure yourself to the abuse. Or maybe you just stop contributing to the Kernel.
- jessaustin 13y ago

Delmania 13y ago

Swearing is not a problem. In fact, people who swear tend to be more honest than those who don't. You don't have to be polite, you don't have to avoid confrontations. What you have to be is respectful. You should never attack a person, you should attack their actions. But only after you understand.

eksith 13y ago
> In fact, people who swear tend to be more honest than those who don't [citation needed] There's a whole lot of context involved here. Yes, there are very honest people who curse like sailors (fishermen especially [1]), likewise there are honest people who wouldn't throw about farthing filth about fornication willy-nilly[2]. I would add that ideas, in addition to actions, are fair game. [1] Deadliest Catch [2] Ex-Mormon colleague
- ZoF 13y ago
  Your sources are a TV show and an ex-mormon?
  - eksith 13y ago
    The TV show was cheek. The ex-Mormon, I've known for 12 years.
daemon13 13y ago
Which is what Linus did...

codyb 13y ago

Is it not possible to both be, perhaps stern and clear in view without being abrasive? "Hey John, thanks for contributing. I see you updated X. There's a lot of good there but this algorithm really needs to run faster and use less memory. Check out how Sarah did it here when working with Y. Additionally, here's some resources. Thanks."

14113 13y ago
That implies that it's ok. I would prefer: "Hey john, thanks for the contribution though, but it's not good enough - it's currently too slow and hogs too much memory. As an example of how it should be running see sarah's Y."
- codyb 13y ago
  That would be the case I suppose if John's entire contribution was poor. I was thinking perhaps there might be some part of John's contribution that was actually quality and to say "hey, you know you're doing good work, it's just this part that isn't working well". Obviously we're dealing in hypotheticals here and I guess if it is the case that none of John's code works well then your approach is probably the only decent approach. If there is some code of John's that does work well than I find a lot of times it's easier to give a little compliment prior to your criticism just so they know that yes, we do appreciate your work and contributions, but in order to be more effective here is what you have to do.
- andyjohnson0 13y ago
  Have you ever managed or lead a team? If you have, you'll know that your job in that situation is to get the best results from the team - over a variety of time-scales. Sometimes you have to crack the whip, but mostly its important to be somewhat diplomatic and respectful while still being clear and direct, because the team is made of people who (unless it has some kind of dysfunctional brogramming-type culture) have a need for fulfilment in the work they're doing. Some cultures are more direct (eg. Dutch, Israeli, Finnish) than others (eg. Japan). If everyone on a team expects the same norms then they are going to get along well. The problem for Linus is that the "team" is a pan-cultural community with a spread of norms and (it seems to me) that Linus want to be the Linux benevolent-dictator-for-life while everyone else expects him to be a leader.

stackcollision 13y ago

'Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untraveled, the naïve, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as "empty," "meaningless," or "dishonest," and scorn to use them. No matter how "pure" their motives, they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at best.'

icesoldier 13y ago
I know I've seen that quote before, but I forget where.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

jccc 13y ago

I personally hate the "corporate" style culture of being passive agressive, avoiding confrontations, being polite all the times and whatnot. Agreed. If only that were what she's talking about: To me, being "professional" means treating each other with respect. I can show emotion, express displeasure, be direct, and still show respect for my fellow developers. For example, I find the following statement to be both direct and respectful, because it's criticizing code, not the person: "This code is SHIT! It adds new warnings and it's marked for stable when it's clearly *crap code* that's not a bug fix. I'm going to revert this merge, and I expect a fix from you IMMEDIATELY." https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/18/340 https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/18/340 We're adults, not high schoolers. We can figure out how to deliver harsh technical criticism without resorting to name calling, cussing at people, or personal attacks. https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/16/554 https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/16/554 You are in a position of power. Stop verbally abusing your developers. https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/15/427 https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/15/427

pessimizer 13y ago

When it comes to fuck yous, I hate them because they don't communicate anything, although combined with a foreknowledge of the person's impulse control abilities you might be able to figure out their emotional state (which I usually don't care about.) It's just abuse, and if we're going to abuse each other with no content, I might as well punch you, which is fun. Swear words are often just more shit to wade through to get to content. Sweary people like to direct their frustration outwards, but that doesn't necessarily make them direct. I see little relationship between people who throw hissyfits and people who are honest in the way I like. The honesty I like cuts down the search space for reaching pragmatic solutions; it doesn't simply tell me that Billy's blood sugar is getting low.

chalst 13y ago

If interpreted correctly Linus' remarks about the value of having a panel discussion on the issues Sarah raised, he does think it might be possible to find an accomodation on lkml that suits both him and Sarah. Sarah was not passive aggressive, and she did the opposite of avoid confrontation on this matter. It seems odd to me that she is accused of wanting these aspects of corporate style.