Why This Hacker Stood Up Against ‘Verbal Abuse’ in Linux Land
 

Hi,

Why This Hacker Stood Up Against ‘Verbal Abuse’ in Linux Land

The "aggressive tone" has been good for Linux up until now. Why should one person change that ?

This is not about "verbal abuse" or "hate mail", this is about keeping developers in line. If Linus needs to get aggressive, the he should have that right. If you can't handle it, then that is your problem.

It also doesn't matter what gender you are, so don't try to use this as leverage.

In short: I'm with Linus on this one.

Member Response
 

Hi,

I totally disagree! Linus's abuse is not something that should be tolerated. Bully! Professionals can contribute without the vulgar nudge by a bully.

Linus's kernel development does not entitle him to abuse as he sees fit and act like a spoiled kid with the childish abusive antics.

Personally, I have worked as a professional for many decades. :)
No one in a professional atmosphere would be allowed to treat anyone in the manner that Linus has done. Might be smart from a kernel perspective but poor people inter-relational skills. One can get others to perform by treating with respect along will a professional attitude.

Got to agree with H_TeXMeX_H,

The way I see it Linus has a problem where he is having to review 'sub-standard' patches.
He doesn't care about the background of the submitter, just the patch itself. So I believe Linus is well within his rights to demand that the quality improve.
Personally I think that the use of plain, to the point language that everyone understands is far more effective than dancing round the subject with diplomatic double speech.

Going back to my 'opener' here, it is about 'sub-standard' patches and nothing else; not gender, social background, race, religion or any of the other 'playing cards'

here is the maillist post which 'sparked' this
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/15/329

be sure to follow that thread, ( left column )
Some interesting points are raised.

Linus is currently more of a manager of the kernel than a developer. So you're saying that you have been a manager and have gotten people to do work without getting in their face ? Might work for some people some of the time, but once in while you have to be more aggressive, otherwise nothing will get done.

This is not "abuse" or "bullying". Has Linus ever taken anyone's lunch money ? Has he ever insulted someone for no reason ?

It is a style of management and it works. It has worked so far for Linux, and it has also worked in many other environments as well.

Having said that, if Linus were aggressive all of the time, then it would be more of an issue. He has to balance it out a bit. Being aggressive all the time will make developers think that he's like that all the time and ignore him. He must have the right to be aggressive when he needs to. He should also have enough restraint to not be aggressive all of the time, which I believe he does have.

I find that interesting. What does Sharp want? Gold stars, bonuses or raises be handed out for submitting sub-standard work? Did Sharp contribute sub-standard code? I don't really see the problem with getting tough with people who are sub-standard in their performance. The whole article is pretty vague about that. The reference to 'hate mail' doesn't mention anyone and certainly not Torvaalds or Sharps supervisor, so some people are being jerks in their private emails. There is also nothing specific about exactly what "getting tough" entailed.

Torvaalds is responsible for the project and as long as that is true, people who work for him and the organization will need to deal with him even if they object to the manner in which he deals with others.

That type of behavior is not restricted to Open Source. Anyone who has read about the early development of microsoft knows that Gates, Allen and others would constantly abuse, curse, demean and scream at each other and they openly admit it and make no apologies for their behavior. I seriously doubt this type of behavior was limited to microsoft. Personally, I think it would be more productive to not behave in this manner and more would be accomplished by being civil. On the other hand, it seemed to work well for microsoft.

What percentage of people who apply for jobs are women? If 1% of people working there are women and a much larger percentage of women apply for jobs, they could have a problem under California and US law.

"and have it among kernel developers'? Then why this interview, unless anyone who goes on the internet or at least reads wired.com is now a kernel developer?

Torvalds side of things: lkml.org -> Linus Torvalds reply

I also work(ed) for (large) companies as a professional over the last 15+ years and the above quote from Linus' reply is all too familiar and this behaviour annoys the hell out of me.

I'm not advocating the use of "verbal abuse" as a main way of doing things, but I do believe it is necessary and healthy to do so when needed.

I'm with Linus on this one.

Hmm, from reading the (lkml) thread it seems Wired is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Well, as it has been said, they're more tired than wired and guess they need to boost sales.

It isn't news that computer geeks underappreciate the social niceties. Normal urges don't always need to be expressed without restraint over the age of about 3. However, it isn't news that overindulgence in the social niceties leads to politicians, lawyers and other vices. A little balance is appropriate. We don't have to pick sides on this one; Wired is acting like a troll: and don't feed the troll.

I'm familiar with this management style because of my own experiences over the years. What I've seen is that many are successful with it, many are successful without it. It isn't a requirement for success. That's why I'm with Ms. Sharp on this.

Here's another good quote from Linus:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/15/407

There is another important principle that I have been thinking about. I think that keeping things civil all of the time only leads to so much internal tension within a group, that they will use behind the back tactics to get even, or things can escalate very quickly. Things have to be kept fair, not necessarily civil. If you don't like what someone is doing, it is better to tell them, and in a way that is very clear and that they can understand rather than to say "please don't that, please, pretty please, thanks :)". This does not work. From what I've seen, Linus doesn't curse constantly, nor does he abuse anyone in any way. He does curse and become aggressive when things are not going right, and he has to make it very clear to people that it is wrong.

I would also agree that things have been blown out of proportion by the media on this issue ... most likely because of the dominance of feminism in current the mainstream media.

In this case it is Sarah Sharp who is biased in thinking that always using kind and nice words, and never cursing will make everything better. I see Linus as the one who woke her up a bit, and that this is a good thing.

Member Response
 

Hi,
Yes, I have managed other professionals and without abuse or foul language. You do not need to be aggressive in order to manage other professionals. Most professionals do take pride in their work and when something needs attention when brought to them by their manager properly then most will do what it takes to get things right. I really like the way Greg Kroah-Hartman handles his responsibilities. Maybe Linus should look how Greg performs with other professionals involved with the kernel.

Oh yes it is! Whenever you go off on a rant or cursing to get things done then there will be a poor working atmosphere. Not saying you do not need to be corrective or stand ground when someone doesn't perform up to professional standards. You can manage the situation in a honorable professional manner without abuse or foul language.

Maybe in your part of the world. But most organizations do not wish to be behind the eight ball when someone is not performing in a good managerial style by poor management skills.

This is not the first time he has put a foot in the mouth. Aggression is not a good form of managing anyone. One can mentor or even present a reasonable response to a poor or incorrect action. Then that professional can correct the situation.

He's not always working with professionals. His management style has worked so far, and I'm sure it will keep working for a while yet. If you really want to know if his style is bad, have him change his style and see it how it affects kernel quality control.

Grinning as I read all of this.

Slipping the knife in with a smile on your face and speaking in a polite voice does not change the part where it hurts to slip the knife in. Feelings get hurt no matter what.

So getting yelled at or having polite rejection. Same same result in my view.

This:
...and This:Petty much sum up my views on the subject.
In my experience people who are passionate, forthright and sometimes downright rude may be hurtful in the short term but in the long term they're a million times better than those who hide things behind corporate speak or are two frightened to tell things as they are.

Member Response
 

Hi,
No one works with only professionals in the work place. Positive interaction is important between everyone within the wok space.

Only Linus can change his style but Linus is too stubborn to change or feel that his actions are bad. I feel he should be aware of the situation and how other professionals feel about these matters.

I applaud the way that Sarah Sharp has handled the situation. She happens to speak up about the mannerisms and how it effects others. As to feminism, I raised daughters and taught them to believe in their abilities. Showing them that self worth is important throughout their career. The days of the glass ceilings are long gone and the good ole boy network is not as prevalent or strong as it once was.

Professionalism is a important point in any career or work place.