Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Abuse is indefensible

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 221 posts

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#91

Post by ceejayoz »

ekianjo wrote: post #81

> I consider this kind of abuse indefensible. Nonetheless, I’ve seen multiple people defending and even celebrating it. And so what? You have never seen bullies in School ? Are you going to go in the streets and fight for moral righteousness in every corner ? Or are you just picking on Linus because it's an easy target with no controversy ? It's not like people who work with Linus don't know how he acts and interacts…

> You have never seen bullies in School ?

Of course there are bullies in school.

That doesn't make it a good thing. Ideally, there wouldn't be bullies in school. And Linus isn't a child.

> I'd rather have someone who is blunt and direct than someone who smiles to your face and says shit in your back.

False dichotomy. There are plenty of people who smile to your face without having to say shit about you behind your back.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#93

Post by rylee »

thomashabets2 wrote: post #64
ZanyProgrammer wrote: post #19

Why is it that people who support Linus' tirades and mention freedom of speech, etc get so incredibly hurt when others exercise their own freedom of speech and point out how abusive they are?

Because one is saying "what you are saying is wrong" and the other is saying "you should stop talking". That's a fundamental difference. If they get hurt (big "if"), then they are still not saying "and that means you are not allowed to talk". Are you seeing an inconsistency that I'm not?

No one's saying "you are not allowed to talk"; they're saying "you're a jerk if you decide to be pointedly abusive".

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#94

Post by snomad »

I didn't find this rant abusive. Once worked for a law firm in a high stress industry - some of those lawyers were abusive, woah nelly. Also, have a brother who was in army, you can't even imagine the language of he and his friends.

This is child's play and someone who ultimately cares about delivering a quality end product who was offended by someone taking away from that mission. And his point was right, the code was bad and shoehorned into a magical one size fits all solution.

I'm most curious on the age / background of those in this thread who do find it hurtful and offensive.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#95

Post by such_a_casual »

igsmo wrote: post #76

i read this response by linus and it doesn't seem to be abusive to anyone, he's being critical of the code. who is this linus guy anyway? he sounds like a typical new yorker.

>who is this linus guy anyway?

lol. just the guy who wrote linux and git. He's a fin btw.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#96

Post by rylee »

x1024 wrote: post #11

Funny how the author "will moderate comments" and the only comments left are those who uncritically agree with them.

The comments which disagree with the author are patently abusive. I'm not entirely sure what your point here is supposed to be.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#98

Post by Kristine1975 »

x1024 wrote: post #66
Kristine1975 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He makes a lot of claims without backing any of them up.

Are you saying that the claim that the new function "is nonstandard" is false?

No, he's right about that. But it's a red herring: The Linux kernel already uses a lot of GCC-specific, i.e. nonstandard, extensions.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#99

Post by mbrock »

srpablo wrote: post #18
unfamiliar wrote: post #2

I've read a few of Linus' rants and been on the fence, but this one does seem to have crossed some sort of line into being unnecessarily abusive, and to add to that, unclear communication. The rewritten version really does emphasise a much better approach. Linus's rant doesn't read like it was written by... a stable person. I was in full agreement with the article up until this: >Of the many things I could say about…

> Completely irrelevant and not true in my opinion. Hardly, when talking about brash/abusive behavior in the context of an industry where women are underrepresented, I think it's plenty fine to mention that there might be a connection to be made. > the gender of the poster makes no difference Eh, I don't agree. It's well-observed in social sciences that men are given more leeway to be abusive than women are; one exam…

If women are socially punished for being abrasive or bossy, you could consider THAT to be a problem. I might consider it a basic human right to use curse words, get angry, and come off as abrasive, and in fact I truly do.

Somewhat relatedly, the supposition some people have that "women" need to be especially protected from teh scary curse words pisses me off. THAT is a gendered prejudice based on Victorian morality or something.

Re: Abuse is indefensible

#100

Post by enneff »

zubspace wrote: post #38

Linus' version is intimidating. But that's why it is very effective. Case in point, we people on hacker news would have never even read his rant if the language was mild. So in some way it sticks better. You really DO NOT WANT to step on his toes again (and everyone else reading it, too), so in the end Linus' wins. Also, it's sad, but after so many years on the internet I don't consider his language to be abusive. It…

> You really DO NOT WANT to step on his toes again (and everyone else reading it, too), so in the end Linus' wins.

But the person who wrote the code still argued with him. They're still making the same points that they would have made whether Linus were polite or not.

Linus is the lead for the kernel project, so at the end of the day he wins regardless.

Post reply on HN