Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If someone prefers softer conduct The big issue I see people reacting to is profanity. You can be as hard on someone, given the nature of the infraction, without using profane language or denigrating someone. If they don't comply, threaten exactly what Linus threatened, no more commits will be accepted. While I don't disagree with Linus' right to speak as he does. He can be just as effective without the type of lan…
In my culture we use what you'd call profanity as punctuation marks. I feel it is imperialist for people from one culture to want people from other cultures to adhere to their way of communicating.
I understand where you're coming from. It's important to take the cultures and expectations of each participant if one's goal is to communicate effectively. And that goes both ways. Both the speaker and the listener need to take this into account. If one's dogmatic, believing that requiring any change on their own part to accommodate the listener, that gets in the way of the goal of communicating effectively, just as expecting a speaker to conform to one's own standards as a listener. It really needs to be looked at from each person's perspective.