The Argument Machine

I think a lot of the antagonism you see from certain open source communities comes from Twitter nowadays. (That is, angry debates exist everywhere, but it leaks out of Twitter better than someone going crazy in an IRC channel.)

Ten years ago, you had to write a blog post and hit publish.. and that gave you a chance to reflect and retract. But now you can tap out a gut reaction to the latest drama and keep the feedback loop going.

This is all just based on personal observation and therefore unscientific, but I suspect most communities have similar levels of antagonism between members and topics up for internal conflict. Those communities whose members are communicating more on Twitter, however, have dramas that rumble on for longer and get more external coverage than those sheltered away on private mailing lists and IRC channels.

Is "supervillian" an actual word?

Well, if it wasn't, now it is.

There's a lot of this that I agree with, but there's also a lot of it that is limited by personal experience. I for one have never had a fight on Twitter - the closest thing being when I complained about my poor Comcast service - so I can't say I resonate with all of these things.

However, something that should be pointed out: brevity is not inherently the cause for misunderstanding. Brevity is a constraint. Don't try to say hard things in fewer words if you don't understand wit. And, perhaps as importantly, don't say witty things who don't understand them. This is a lesson every good marketing class will teach you, and Ogilvy preached:

"Our business is infested with idiots who try to impress by using pretentious jargon."

But, I suppose when you force the masses to be brief, they won't think of Ogilvy.

Unfortunately people don't start out rational. It's something they have to be taught.