Many moons ago in an organizational behavior / group decisionmaking book whose title I can never keep in mind, I read a fascinating chapter on various group structures for decisionmaking.
Of the various models, the one which works best under more circumstances is that in which there is a leadership role (so there's no indecision over what decision has been made or when it's been taken), but that role is collectively assigned based on merits.
In other words, the leaders' tenure is at the consent of the group as a whole, and can be transfered. The one decision over which the leader has no effective say (or at least: no more than any other individual) is over the question of leadership.
Strikes me as very much the model that's followed by the most successful free software projects.
I believe Linus learning some manners for himself would hardly slow down neither of Linux or Git, and nor would make him a lesser leader. Seriously, there are better ways of putting things forth, than execrating persons who contribute to Linux/Git for a living, on public mailing lists. Leaders need be responsible of their public speech. Someone who is writing curse words in all caps is not speaking responsibly by definition.
In both cases, the result doesn't seem to have hurt what matters: the project themselves and the utility they provide their users.
The goal of the projects isn't to protect tender egos. It's to get shit done and make the right decisions.
Linus answered one woman who'd criticized his behavior by noting that a key issue for him was making absolutely unambiguously clear how good or bad a given technical suggestion was. And he does that.
Here we go: https://plus.google.com/102150693225130002912
Because if you want me to "act professional," I can tell you that I'm not interested. I'm sitting in my home office wearing a bathrobe. The same way I'm not going to start wearing ties, I'm ALSO not going to buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords. Because THAT is what "acting professionally" results in: people resort to all kinds of really nasty things because they are forced to act out their normal urges in unnatural ways.
As I commented at the time:
There's something to be said for being an equal-opportunity asshole, in a fair and balanced manner.
And in running the most effective, successful, beneficial, and largest OS development project the world has ever seen.
I see Linus's behavior as being an instance of Celine's Second Law:
Accurate communication is possible only in a non-punishing situation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celine's_laws\#Celine.27s\_Sec...
"Huh?" you say? But Linus is punishing communication.
No. Linus is communicating. He's expressing a clear view of what is or isn't valuable. The punishment isn't in rating the quality of contributions to the kernel, or usefulness of others' participation in the LKML. It's in criticizing the communications methods used to convey that feedback.
Yes, it may be insensitive. But fuck sensitivity
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/23/75
[2] https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LinusTorvalds/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5
Edit: No need to be as explicit as Linus to be sarcastic.