3 ms·

This doesn't pertain to "Open Source" in general, the same argument can be said about companies and closed-source products, which can be just as well run by jer

This doesn't pertain to "Open Source" in general, the same argument can be said about companies and closed-source products, which can be just as well run by jerks. I have a couple of small projects published on GitHub and the people that interacted with me have been very professional and thankful for my work. I am also a part of big open-source communities which are very professional and asshole behavior is definitely an exception and is being punished in general. A comment like "How did they not die as babies, considering that they were likely too stupid to find a tit to suck on?" is only tolerated if you're Linus Torvalds or somebody like him that has contributed a lot and that is tolerated in spite of his character. And yes, the world is full of jerks that want to copy Linus Torvalds, or Theo de Raadt, or Richard Stallman, or Steve Jobs, or David Heinemeier Hansson, or whatever else ruthless leader with strong opinions that happened in this industry, but without the track record to back up their strong thoughts. Open Source is only special because the discussions are often public for anybody to see. I do find Linus' behavior regrettable, as he's a very public person in this industry, his opinions do have legs and he is a role model for others. And I'm personally against PC talk, for example I think usage of the word "fuck" is totally legitimate because it implies passion, it implies that you care, but I think critiques should never be ad-hominem and people breaking this rule should get social punishment, including Linus.

PaulHoule 12y ago
I think if you're involved in a closed-source company and you act like an ass too many times you'll get fired.
- Niksko 12y ago
  The difference is that in a corporate setting, if you're fired that's the end of it. Fortunately or unfortunately, in an open source setting, if you act like an asshat you can still contribute and discuss and continue to be an asshat. And then other people ignore you. So you convince people that they're the asshat. And people believe you because you're still there. I'm not sure it's really a flaw. It's just the way it is. I feel as if it's simply one of the tradeoffs that you make with an open source project. People can hang around and be annoying and abusive and there isn't all that much you can do to totally get rid of them if they're determined. On the other hand, you can get brilliant programmers who come out of nowhere and have no qualifications that would never get past the interview stage in a large company.
- bad_user 12y ago
  It depends - usually the thinking is that this has an impact on the company's bottom line, therefore employees are forbidden to act like this in public. Internal dialogs are an entirely different matter on the other hand. And in open-source I actively avoid projects that are run by jerks, because my thinking is that an open-source project has less chance of surviving and flourishing when being led by jerks, plus the community's support will probably be frustrating. So that's part of the cost analysis I'm usually doing, with the exception being big projects that are very well established.
- chubot 12y ago
  Not really, the same rule basically applies. If you have clout, people will tolerate your abuse (e.g. Steve Ballmer). If you don't you might get fired. I think it's actually better in open source because the way to earn clout is through solid contributions. That is not really true at most companies -- you have clout through your title/position on the ladder, which may or may not be earned.
- vidarh 12y ago
  Or you get promoted. It depends greatly on company culture. What I've tended to see in companies, though, is that instead of venting like this and getting it over with, there is backstabbing, intrigue, and much worse insults veiled in language that provide deniability. Personally, I'd prefer being on the receiving end of Linus' approach to most of the "nicer" hostility I've seen in corporate settings.
- dscrd 12y ago
  Except that Linus isn't fireable in this analogy. He's on the top of the hierarchy, equivalent to a major shareholder and CEO of a company. Such a person can certainly act like an asshole every second inside his organisation and keep his position. The notable difference is that due to the nature of the enterprise, Linus pours shit in public. In a company, it might perhaps happen in a smaller gathering, like a board meeting.
mtbcoder 12y ago
I think when you have the time to write and edit your thoughts for people to read, "fuck" is witless and lazy.

PaulHoule 12y ago

I think if you're involved in a closed-source company and you act like an ass too many times you'll get fired.

Niksko 12y ago
The difference is that in a corporate setting, if you're fired that's the end of it. Fortunately or unfortunately, in an open source setting, if you act like an asshat you can still contribute and discuss and continue to be an asshat. And then other people ignore you. So you convince people that they're the asshat. And people believe you because you're still there. I'm not sure it's really a flaw. It's just the way it is. I feel as if it's simply one of the tradeoffs that you make with an open source project. People can hang around and be annoying and abusive and there isn't all that much you can do to totally get rid of them if they're determined. On the other hand, you can get brilliant programmers who come out of nowhere and have no qualifications that would never get past the interview stage in a large company.
bad_user 12y ago
It depends - usually the thinking is that this has an impact on the company's bottom line, therefore employees are forbidden to act like this in public. Internal dialogs are an entirely different matter on the other hand. And in open-source I actively avoid projects that are run by jerks, because my thinking is that an open-source project has less chance of surviving and flourishing when being led by jerks, plus the community's support will probably be frustrating. So that's part of the cost analysis I'm usually doing, with the exception being big projects that are very well established.
chubot 12y ago
Not really, the same rule basically applies. If you have clout, people will tolerate your abuse (e.g. Steve Ballmer). If you don't you might get fired. I think it's actually better in open source because the way to earn clout is through solid contributions. That is not really true at most companies -- you have clout through your title/position on the ladder, which may or may not be earned.
vidarh 12y ago
Or you get promoted. It depends greatly on company culture. What I've tended to see in companies, though, is that instead of venting like this and getting it over with, there is backstabbing, intrigue, and much worse insults veiled in language that provide deniability. Personally, I'd prefer being on the receiving end of Linus' approach to most of the "nicer" hostility I've seen in corporate settings.
dscrd 12y ago
Except that Linus isn't fireable in this analogy. He's on the top of the hierarchy, equivalent to a major shareholder and CEO of a company. Such a person can certainly act like an asshole every second inside his organisation and keep his position. The notable difference is that due to the nature of the enterprise, Linus pours shit in public. In a company, it might perhaps happen in a smaller gathering, like a board meeting.

mtbcoder 12y ago

I think when you have the time to write and edit your thoughts for people to read, "fuck" is witless and lazy.