You bet your ass I asked for him to be fired. He wasn't, so I quit.
I'm very sorry that my post rubbed you the wrong way. My intention is simply to suggest that we shouldn't tolerate antisocial behavior in our communities, and that we should ask those behaving badly to stop. Do you disagree?
I propose that a large portion of the reaction against your statements is that until this comment, many or most of the people assumed you meant a more common form of asshole: e.g. the guy who defends his code too hard, or the guy who isn't good at criticizing others' work. The term asshole, at least as used by large numbers of people, applies to both cases. Getting someone fired because they are a bit caustic is not at all an appropriate reaction, whereas as a response to violence it is (probably) an appropriate reaction.
Alerting your manager that the situation is intolerable is perfectly cool. Demanding that someone be fired just isn't. (This applies to customers demanding employees to be fired, too.) If the offense is really that serious, the manager already knows how to handle it. If he has a history of these things, again, the manager knows and can deal with it. There is a chain of command in place for a reason.
It's your right to quit whenever you want, for whatever reason you want. I don't argue with that. I would probably refuse to work with the chair-thrower, too, out of safety concerns. But I wouldn't demand he be fired.
For any given job, there are hundreds of other equally deserving candidates who aren't jerks. Getting fired gives assholes a chance to learn their behavior isn't acceptable, and is only fair to the more-deserving candidate who then fills the position.
Pathological extremes at both ends are still pathological, the correct response to an extreme is not its opposite, but a reasonable alternative.
It is entirely possible to hold a firm stance on what you think is the correct approach without being a jerk. It is equally possible to create a friendly atmosphere without acting like a used car salesman. I think you're reading more into the GP's statements than was intended.
If that isn't what you're implying, then it seems you are putting up a false choice between merit and people skills.
In fact, I am suggesting that your notion of 0-tolerance for assholism is an extreme, no better than complete endorsement and rewards for assholism. If you are not suggesting 0-tolerance for assholism, then I appologize, it just seems that way since you respond to call for moderation and some tolerance with a rejection of that principle.
Maybe your "nice guy" teammate doesn't actually keep the production db running correctly and who cares if the "asshole" has to cleanup. It really shouldn't matter that to not get blamed the "asshole" needs to do the work themselves. Maybe you send some e-mail not knowing what is going on and that sends the "asshole" up the wall. Heck, you did the "asshole" a favor since the "asshole" needs to learn a lesson(2).
1) author of article says all "assholes" are guys, which I find quite unbelievable.
2) add one of the "asshole"'s parents getting cancer and I've seen that one (with sleep deprivation)
You've asked for them to be fired? That wasn't your place, and the penalty is far too harsh for the crime. You were attempting to ruin their livelihood because you don't like them.
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." - The Bible. Nobody would get to throw a stone. Nobody fits the criteria of being 'perfect'.