geergar

Social Networks with real name policies can be just as anonymous as 4chan. And sometimes, an IRC channel where everyone has a pseudonym can be more intimate than anything else. What makes the difference is:

- Moderation

- Small Groups

- Regulars who get to know each other

You can achieve this anywhere online. But I think IRC lends itself to smaller, closely knit communities.

> The trouble is the platform is almost a monopoly on user created video.

I agree entirely. So the solution is to break up the monopoly. We can start by breaking up google:

https://apps.bostonglobe.com/opinion/graphics/2018/06/break-...

We also need to promote interchangeability and open standards. Not sure how to do this - wonder if legislation is required.

from HN Welcome page:

"Stories on HN don't have to be about hacking, because good hackers aren't only interested in hacking, but they do have to be deeply interesting."

Also, what is so political about this? It's history.

> What you call a jerk is what i see as a interesting person.

There's no accounting for taste, so you're welcome to find verbal abuse interesting. But the overwhelming majority of people do not like being treated with disrespect.

> People have cultures and personalities, many which are not understood by other cultures and personalities.

This isn't a cultural issue. Linus is from Finland. In Finnish culture, it's rude to imply your coworker an idiot. It's rude in most cultures to do so.

Linus is a fluent English speaker. He knows what "idiocy" means, and he knows that it's disrespectful to Andy. That's why he's saying it.

> Carefully measured polite language is absolutely exhausting for many of us.

Nobody is suggesting we use carefully measured language. That is exhausting.

What I'm suggesting is, just don't be a jerk. Watch how easy it is:

"Andy, what is the background for trying to push this idiocy?"

vs

"Andy, what is the background for trying to push this?"

The second statement isn't cluttered by polite language. And it actually takes less effort to say than the first. Yet it's far less Jerky.

> I prefer us to exist side by side instead of banning one in favour of the other.

In general, people should learn to work with people who are different from them. I work with people who have a different religion from me, speak with a different accent, or have different interests from me. And we put aside our differences to work together. It works well.

But there is one kind of person you can't work with, no matter how many differences you put aside, and that's a bully.

>This must be a cultural thing.

Yes. Parts of the FOSS community have a culture that apologizes for jerky behavior.

>There are plenty of people who happily interact like this daily.

There are plenty of jerks, yes.

> I think it is reasonable for them to continue acting like themselves.

Being part of a team means accommodating your team members. We can argue what is a reasonable accommodation or what is not. But it's not too much to ask for Linus to stop typing in all caps, or accusing his team members of being morons.

> I don't find the way Linus writes offensive in the slightest. To me it is mildly amusing while making a point.

It's possible to be amusing and make a point without singling out a contributor for humiliation. Obviously, we have to be free to criticize other's work. But as the article shows, most of Linus's message isn't constructive criticism. It can be re-written to mean the same thing, yet preserve the dignity of the person he's criticizing.

We need people to contribute to open source projects. Being a jerk to others scares contributors away.

Read the article. The rewritten email was focused on the work. But Linus's email was mostly focused on humiliating a contributor.

So it is Linus who is not being an adult.