That observation aside, I easily see what your point is, but I don't agree with the principle of it. In this case this wasn't a direct ad hominem attack by Linus. I fail to see that given the rest of the email thread. More importantly however is the fact that the individualism involved is what makes things interesting and gets the points across. Since you like literature it seems, you should surely understand the importance of the reviews and critics of such works. Often these were quite brutal, but again they drove home the points, whether they are right or wrong isn't the issue either. A sugar coated world just isn't a reflection of a real world.
Literally? No. Nobody is suggesting that we weigh down others with chains.
Of course I don't think Vonnegut was being literal either...
This slippery slope argument is garbage and YOU are a piece of shit for advocating it! You must watch Fox news and are a devotee of "shock jock" radio that tickles your reptilian brain and amps up the right neurotransmitters in the risk reward system to crave impolite and rude behavior!
(I hope I drove home the point with that bogus rant that individuality-through-angry-shouting doesn't elevate the debate at all, it just incentivizes the other party to become even more recalcitrant and unreasonable)
Hot tempers and passionate are not the problem. Strongly worded rebuttals are not a problem. Direct ad hominem attacks are just unnecessary. You can be strong and aggressive without telling people to "SHUT THE FUCK UP"
Trust me, being a dick isn't only way to be adversarial.