The problem with many self-organized groups of engineers is that they equate meritocracy with technical contributions. This is a very, very limited way of appr

The problem with many self-organized groups of engineers is that they equate meritocracy with technical contributions. This is a very, very limited way of approaching the complex dynamics of people working together. It shows up in many ways. Most open source communities are not good places for people who can contribute design, documentation and god forbid, people management skills. A pervasive illusion amongst software engineers is that we can do without "soft" skills, and nowhere does this manifests itself more in places where no boss or company forcefully adds those soft skills into the mix. Some open source communities are lucky enough to have people that have both the technical chops to get respect based on technically focused meritocratic values and have other "management" skills. Most don't. So once conflict arises (as it inevitably will, because they are human beings) and simple meritocracy no longer suffices (because both sides are smart and contribute), the community either breaks up or devolves into a permanent Lord of the Flies atmosphere. It has nothing to do with Open Source in general. It's the lack of value placed on soft skills in tech driven meritocracies. (You can see the same thing in tech start-ups founded by technies, but there it usually gets quickly corrected after the first PR disaster.)