Dear Open Source Project Leader: Quit Being A Jerk

Won't we be given some specifics so that we don't have to guess what famous OSS author actually typed "HAHAHA" at a pull request ?

This part struck me - as a college student who hasn't been involved in tech culture for that long, all I had heard of Linus is about his brilliance but his harshness and perhaps arrogance.

So, assuming my impression and Hahn's are both accurate - what changed? I think that the stress of life gets to us and we start to cut the pleasantries, tact, and niceties that seem to slow us down. We don't mean to be a jerk, but the fast-paced lives we commit ourselves to don't allow time for us to treat others as respectfully as we can. We're blunt because it is easier on us and we don't care about what it does to others.

While I try to be polite regardless, I have no strong issue with people who are blunt by default (I also happen to think there's a fine line between bluntness and rudeness, but that's a different topic altogether). I think the key of what you said is “once they've made it clear they're intentionally” doing what they're doing. That is what makes a person toxic. Missing documentation or contribution guidelines or what have you on the first try, less so. On the second try, I'd say bluntness is in order (“we've already asked you to do X, please keep that in mind in future requests” or somesuch). After that, you're dealing with a person who is dragging down both your community and your own time. That's a problem.

And still, it's more productive and beneficial to the community as a whole to be blunt rather than derisive.

Anyway, yeah, net net, I fully agree :)

The mistake so many people make is to let someone's lack of knowledge translate into “stupidity”, which is typically defined, and defined by you yourself, as an inherent, unchangeable trait. We toss around the word stupid, but it's got two meanings. One is the one I use with my friends when I talk about something who doesn't know as much about something I do. The other one is the one you use to justify derision. Besides not accepting derision in general, I think there are very very few legitimate instances where the other one applies at all.

“And anyways, if you have an open source project, and it's set up in such a way that commits have to be approved by one person or a group of people, then that one person or group of people are the only people who's point of view matters, at least when it comes to that code in that project. Don't like it? That's what forking is for.”

We're talking about whether people should change their behavior. That applies to current show-runners, not to whoever chooses to fork a project. Once your project is entrenched, you can feel like you have the power to say whatever you want because your community is vast. That's a problem.

“Disagree. Derision is a society's way of pointing out that you did something you shouldn't have. I have absolutely no problem with mocking stupidity. Stupidity is evil and everything wrong with the world, and should be mocked and driven out mercilessly at every opportunity.”

Literally, mocking is one huge component of bullying. There's no question about it, just watch a bully. Mocking is bullying. Derision is bullying. There are other ways to point out you've done something you shouldn't have, including stating it politely.

Pointing at a silly pull request and saying “wat” isn't in the same ballpark as bullying solely because it hasn't been done to you when you've been trying to do something you hadn't done before. Or because you hadn't tried to have a social interaction (as opening a pull request is) when you're generally nervous about such, only to be slapped in the face by a comment like that.

“If you got a pull request into that system, then you obviously got ahold of that information some way.”

Yeah, that blog post that mentioned pull requests were legit. Then I googled pull request with the project name and found where I do those. Then I opened a pull request with my changes.

Uh-oh, there was a guide I missed somewhere. Crap. Clearly the proper response to that is mockery and anger, rather than an understanding that maybe I wasn't intentionally trying to waste your time.

“Time is valuable.”

I have never heard a lamer excuse for being an ass (I'm not calling you one, by the way—I'm saying in general), sorry. Yes, time is valuable. You can be polite about pointing that out instead of being derisive. You can say “wat” or you can say “We can't really take this pull request; there's no reason to add this feature.” Or “unfortunately this pull request doesn't adhere to our code guidelines, and I'm afraid I don't have time to help you get it in line with those right now”. Something that acknowledges that maybe their time is valuable, too. Since these are people who want to become members of your community, and invest their own time in it as well.