4 ms·

Not at all. I was making no positive logical argument. Merely pointing out the flaw in the one I responded to. To put it plainly, the post I responded to made

Not at all. I was making no positive logical argument. Merely pointing out the flaw in the one I responded to. To put it plainly, the post I responded to made the claim: "Linus was nice when he posted it to the GCC list; therefore everything is fine." This argument doesn't hinge on the GCC guys having thick skin but rather on the apparent unlikeliness of their seeing the more offensive messages in the kernel list. Further, even if we take into account the 'thick skin' argument, it does not excuse the behavior-- bad behavior is bad even if the affected party doesn't think so. This is why often times the State will prosecute domestic violence cases even when the affected spouse/partner does not wish to do so.

yohanatan 12y ago
And whoever is downvoting these posts is a sick human being.
- Pacabel 12y ago
  Even if we disagree about the other matters being discussed earlier, I do have to agree with you about the misvoting you've been subjected to. There is no legitimate reason for your comments to have been voted down. I'm seeing this sort of blatant and unjustifiable misvoting happening more and more often here. It's really making it harder to read a lot of legitimate content, and it's discouraging participation in otherwise perfectly fine discussion.
pdonis 12y ago
> This argument doesn't hinge on the GCC guys having thick skin but rather on the apparent unlikeliness of their seeing the more offensive messages in the kernel list. I made no such argument; in fact my reply to you specifically recognized the fact that a GCC developer might come across Linus' message on the Linux kernel list. My argument was that such a GCC developer would recognize that the Linux kernel mailing list does not belong to him or his project, it belongs to Linus and his project, and the fact that Linus' tone when he posted to GCC's bug tracker was quite different shows that Linus understands the difference too.
- yohanatan 12y ago
  Maybe it would help if you read the conversation again. I'll paste here for convenience: >>>>>> Linus just being Linus (paraphrased). >>>>> That may be so but I'm pretty sure that pretty much every study that's been done on this says insulting people is demotivating and generally destructive behaviour. >>>> He has not insulted any people though. He has said bad things about the piece of software called gcc-4.9.0, but he has not once in that email adressed a person in a negative way. >>> Uh, do you think GCC just spontaneously sprung forth into being? No, it was created by people, and Linus is indirectly insulting them. >> As a number of people have already commented, when Linus posted the bug report to the GCC project, he was careful not to insult them. > Do you think those people exist in some sort of vacuum where they don't have access to (or will become aware of) the kernel mailing list thread? Did you really intend to say that a person can only be insulted if they are insulted in every place a particular issue is discussed? Or are you saying that if a person is treated kindly in at least one avenue, then it doesn't matter how many others they may be insulted in (i.e., the one kind treatment negates all the other offenses)?
  - pdonis 12y ago
    Since you brought it up in your quote, I should clarify that I agree with the person who said that insulting a piece of software is not the same as insulting the person who created it, not even "indirectly". That said, my own argument had nothing to do with "what counts as an insult", whether Linus being non-insulting on the GCC bug tracker "cancels out" what he said on the kernel mailing list, etc., etc. I was simply pointing out that the fact that Linus was not insulting when he posted the bug on the GCC bug tracker indicates that he had a genuine intention to help get the bug fixed. (The GCC bug tracker thread makes it clear that the GCC developers recognized that too.) In other words, I (like the other commenters I referred to) was focusing on whether or not Linus was actually trying to help or not, and what actually got accomplished as a result of his raising the issue. You are focusing on what kind of language he used and where, whether it was "kind", whether "kind" language in one place "cancels out" insulting language in another place, etc., regardless of the substance of what does or does not get accomplished. I was not making any claim whatever about the questions you raise.

yohanatan 12y ago

And whoever is downvoting these posts is a sick human being.

Pacabel 12y ago
Even if we disagree about the other matters being discussed earlier, I do have to agree with you about the misvoting you've been subjected to. There is no legitimate reason for your comments to have been voted down. I'm seeing this sort of blatant and unjustifiable misvoting happening more and more often here. It's really making it harder to read a lot of legitimate content, and it's discouraging participation in otherwise perfectly fine discussion.

pdonis 12y ago

> This argument doesn't hinge on the GCC guys having thick skin but rather on the apparent unlikeliness of their seeing the more offensive messages in the kernel list. I made no such argument; in fact my reply to you specifically recognized the fact that a GCC developer might come across Linus' message on the Linux kernel list. My argument was that such a GCC developer would recognize that the Linux kernel mailing list does not belong to him or his project, it belongs to Linus and his project, and the fact that Linus' tone when he posted to GCC's bug tracker was quite different shows that Linus understands the difference too.

yohanatan 12y ago
Maybe it would help if you read the conversation again. I'll paste here for convenience: >>>>>> Linus just being Linus (paraphrased). >>>>> That may be so but I'm pretty sure that pretty much every study that's been done on this says insulting people is demotivating and generally destructive behaviour. >>>> He has not insulted any people though. He has said bad things about the piece of software called gcc-4.9.0, but he has not once in that email adressed a person in a negative way. >>> Uh, do you think GCC just spontaneously sprung forth into being? No, it was created by people, and Linus is indirectly insulting them. >> As a number of people have already commented, when Linus posted the bug report to the GCC project, he was careful not to insult them. > Do you think those people exist in some sort of vacuum where they don't have access to (or will become aware of) the kernel mailing list thread? Did you really intend to say that a person can only be insulted if they are insulted in every place a particular issue is discussed? Or are you saying that if a person is treated kindly in at least one avenue, then it doesn't matter how many others they may be insulted in (i.e., the one kind treatment negates all the other offenses)?
- pdonis 12y ago
  Since you brought it up in your quote, I should clarify that I agree with the person who said that insulting a piece of software is not the same as insulting the person who created it, not even "indirectly". That said, my own argument had nothing to do with "what counts as an insult", whether Linus being non-insulting on the GCC bug tracker "cancels out" what he said on the kernel mailing list, etc., etc. I was simply pointing out that the fact that Linus was not insulting when he posted the bug on the GCC bug tracker indicates that he had a genuine intention to help get the bug fixed. (The GCC bug tracker thread makes it clear that the GCC developers recognized that too.) In other words, I (like the other commenters I referred to) was focusing on whether or not Linus was actually trying to help or not, and what actually got accomplished as a result of his raising the issue. You are focusing on what kind of language he used and where, whether it was "kind", whether "kind" language in one place "cancels out" insulting language in another place, etc., regardless of the substance of what does or does not get accomplished. I was not making any claim whatever about the questions you raise.