I am sad that I do not have the ability to downvote this utter tripe.

From the author's twitter a/c:

> Linux story was a bit unusual for #MeToo, because the abusive conduct wasn’t necessarily directed at women – yet the climate of abuse and nastiness had the effect, critics say, of driving out women.

It's not just unusual for #MeToo - it's fucking downright inappropriate to even attempt to tie it in with #MeToo.

The good old "critics say". Who are these critics - do they have names or special knowledge that could inform us as to whether they're qualified to make these criticisms?

Are they random people on twitter by any chance?

The named girl in the article was retweeted by author & had this to say:

> If you wanted to work in operating systems but left or never joined because of Linus Torvalds, please reply to this tweet or DM me. RTs for reach appreciated!

who herself retweets some other random who tweeted(in relation to Linuses salary):

> Agreed. There are two issues being conflated:

> 1) Given Linus's behavior, he is not qualified to lead the project.

> 2) The salary he is receiving is fair compensation for the lead of the Linux project (assuming the person in that role is qualified)

Even as a liberal European, the current toxic nonsense being spouted by these people is most definitely well past the "jumping the shark" moment.

The named girl was Valerie Aurora, once a prominent kernel dev -- hardly "random". If you haven't heard of her -- well, that's part of the problem innit. Linus's attitude, and the tolerance for same he fostered within the kernel community, capped her potential as a contributor and ultimately scared her off.

> hardly "random".

I think if you re-read my comment, you'll see I didn't refer to her as "random"

> Linus's attitude

...which was the same before she started contributing & was __the same__ towards __everyone else__.

I hate this title. It implies first that Linus was the target of the abuse and that he is stepping aside permanently. New Yorker strikes again...

I think the title is poorly written, rather than trying to further an agenda. The article immediately makes it clear Linus is the source of the abuse.

If only code as sloppily written as this article could have been submitted to Torvalds some months ago, the email would have been worth reading.

I still don't get it. Why his public admission of doing wrong? Why didn't he just change his behavior?

The current GamerGater/anti-SJW conspiracy theory is that someone or a group with an agenda "got to" Linus and this is the result of a struggle session that will eventually lead to his ouster from kernel dev, to be replaced with their agents of influence (whoever "they" are).

I don't want to say that they have a convincing case, but just recently Guido stepped down from Python maintenance, and soon after there was a push to excise "master" and "slave" from all documentation. And you know what Ian Fleming said: once is happenstance, twice is coincidence...

Nevertheless, from my standpoint it's a bit heartening to see Linus openly acknowledge his mistakes and take steps to change the Linux culture. We shall see what fruit these steps bear.

Just an article by another precious snowflake white knight eager to hear his inconsequential opinion farted out.

Just a comment from another GamerGater eager to find SJW bogeymen under every stone and behind every tree.

Would both of you please not post this dross on Hacker News?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

That was actually a very useful link. I am somewhat disappointed that there is no standard for quality of articles submitted. I am so tired of reading leftist bleeding heart sob-stories on what is supposed to be an engineering news site