|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

On kernel mailing list behavior

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 22, 2013 22:50 UTC (Mon) by price (guest, #59790)
In reply to: On kernel mailing list behavior by Baylink
Parent article: On kernel mailing list behavior

Well, let's be clear here. As I wrote, the article invited readers to infer that Sarah invented talk of physical violence. I.e., that she imagined that there had been some such talk when there hadn't been.

But, in fact, she quoted Linus saying that Greg "*should* scare [people]", because he is "a freakish giant" who "might squish you". Now, I think this is clearly a joke, and you might argue any number of other claims to the effect that it is obviously a joke, or all in good fun, or the violence it jokes about is relatively mild, or that the other messages in the thread were strictly about words, etc. But no matter how you feel about jokes about physical violence, it doesn't make them not about physical violence.


to post comments

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 22, 2013 23:17 UTC (Mon) by josh (subscriber, #17465) [Link] (2 responses)

That's exactly the issue. And the non-joking point of Linus's mail was precisely to draw a parallel between physical intimidation and mailing-list intimidation, by arguing that Greg should flame people to make himself more intimidating, less approachable, and less of a "doormat". That non-joking point kicked off this whole discussion.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 23, 2013 16:10 UTC (Tue) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link] (1 responses)

Yeah, no. See, at this point, I have to dismiss you as not living in a world where the sky color is blue.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 27, 2013 21:56 UTC (Sat) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

FWIW, I agree with him.

(But then the sky outside my window isn't blue. It's black.)

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 22, 2013 23:45 UTC (Mon) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link] (1 responses)

Oh, sure.

But the continuum above and below "reasonable threat" is so well established that it's established *in US Law*: "assault" is what happens when someone makes a threat against you which a reasonable man would construe as a valid threat.

If that midget who punched people's crotches on Scrubs threatened Arnold Schwarzenegger, that wouldn't be an assault, legally. The reverse would. It's what the Russians call "objective circumstances".

A "reasonable person" as the law defines that, and as case law from judges and juries illustrates it, would not construe the comments made about Greg KH as reasonable threats, even in the abstract (as opposed to their being aimed at a particular person *by* Greg), absent a pretty clear indication that Greg has a violent nature and is prone to go about "squishing" people.

So, out here in the Real World, no, it is not in fact reasonable to construe that entire conversation as violence, discussions of or incitement to violence, or anything near it, and the law -- and the reasonable man -- will construe you as a crank if you do.

If Greg KH *said that to Sarah*, *as a total stranger*, it would of course be a completely different situation. But the situation which pertains here would, I think, get an DA yelled at for even filing it, assuming her boss would allow her to. (See, there's no way in English for me to make the boss female too, to complete my point.)

Finally: by going off on a rant about this particular issue in this particular context, Ms Sharp is doing no favors to the people who *are* on the reasonable-person side of the divide; viz all the convention-harassment issues that are presently big topics for discussion on the Net.

Alas, I fear, this conversation -- the whole page of it -- will ultimately prove mostly fruitless as -- as with so many such arguments -- the two sides can't even agree on what the topic is.

On kernel mailing list behavior

Posted Jul 23, 2013 4:42 UTC (Tue) by josh (subscriber, #17465) [Link]

We're not talking about "what would rise to the level of a prosecutable threat"; that's a strawman, and nobody in this entire discussion would begin to think *that* of any mail in this LKML discussion.

We're talking about the suggestion that a kernel developer should flame people more to become more intimidating, by analogy with physical intimidation. *That's* what kicked this whole thing off.


Copyright © 2026, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds