Code, conflict, and conduct

Posted Sep 21, 2018 16:29 UTC (Fri) by Tara_Li (guest, #26706)
In reply to: Code, conflict, and conduct by jbicha
Parent article: Code, conflict, and conduct

Mmmm - if those are considered abusive... Frankly, I don't know what to think. I just can't comprehend the standard by which those are judged abusive. Is it "That makes me feel bad?" If so... this whole discussion is abusive, because it makes me feel bad for the future of the human race.

Code, conflict, and conduct

Posted Sep 24, 2018 15:55 UTC (Mon) by JFlorian (guest, #49650) [Link] (5 responses)

I'm with you. In fact, I'd go even further and wish that more discourse was this direct and obvious. Maybe Linus lacks tact. I'm probably the same, but I *know* I often don't get the point on the receiving end simply because I'm corresponding with someone who uses too much tact.

Mean what you say, say what you mean. Be strict on your output, forgiving on your input.

Code, conflict, and conduct

Posted Sep 24, 2018 16:19 UTC (Mon) by jbicha (subscriber, #75043) [Link] (4 responses)

It's possible to be direct and obvious without cursing and without saying thing like "have you learnt *nothing*?"

I believe the last 2 sentences of this email demonstrate emotionally abusive language.

Code, conflict, and conduct

Posted Sep 27, 2018 18:30 UTC (Thu) by marmalade (guest, #127517) [Link]

Seriously? That's "emotionally abusive"?

That's not emotionally abusive, it's direct. In a huge project people need to be told "no" sometimes in a manner that lets them know it's not okay.

I've seen people in the workplace who don't learn because nobody is willing to be "mean". Sometimes you need to be "mean". Feeling bad is part of growing up and improving yourself. It's incentive. If everyone just tells you "it's okay" nothing changes, you just coast along thinking that it's okay if you mess up or do something wrong or stupid, because there's no consequence.

Negative emotions are not to be dispensed with. You *should* feel bad sometimes. It's a critical part of the human experience.

Code, conflict, and conduct

Posted Sep 27, 2018 21:08 UTC (Thu) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359) [Link] (2 responses)

Those last 2 sentences being:

> I'm, disappointed in the whole feature, but I'm also tired of having
> to go and even look for these things.
>
> Then actually *finding* them makes me just pissed off.

I think these are appropriate, not abusive. They are "I" statements. Linus. it talking about how he feels. This is always a reasonable thing to do. If hearing about Linus' feelings makes you upset, then that really is your problem, not his.

The previous sentence:

> Dammit, have you learnt *nothing*?

Isn't an "I" statement, so it would probably have been better to leave it out. However it is phrased as a question, not as an attack, so it should not be too hard to read it objectively, and respond to it accordingly.

Code, conflict, and conduct

Posted Sep 27, 2018 22:08 UTC (Thu) by apoelstra (subscriber, #75205) [Link] (1 responses)

> However it is phrased as a question, not as an attack

Honestly that line seems like one of the most hurtful things I've seen cited in these comments. The implication is clearly that Kay *hadn't* learned anything, out of negligence or stupidity or whatever.

I don't know whether Linus can distinguish hurtful things from non-hurtful things (his statement about stepping away "to learn about human emotions" suggests that he thinks he can't), but it's clear that many people in this space lack this ability (I don't mean you, just in general). It's interesting to read comments like these because helps me, and hopefully others, to see what this distinction is, because it's often unclear over text and across cultures.

It's also interesting to see mainstream reporters, whose job it is to communicate, get this wrong. For example, I think counting f-bombs or slurs is a total red herring, and I also think any derogatory terms about *code* rather than *people* are fine. (Though in fairness, the latter point is somewhat unique to open source development -- it is definitely not true in most cultures that you can criticize someone's work, even on purely technical grounds, and expect it to be non-personal.)

Code, conflict, and conduct

Posted Oct 2, 2018 6:50 UTC (Tue) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359) [Link]

> > However it is phrased as a question, not as an attack
>
> Honestly that line seems like one of the most hurtful things I've seen cited in these comments.

Thanks - that's really valuable and on-point. I genuinely didn't think that line would be very hurtful at all, but clearly not everyone shares my opinion.
This re-enforces the importance of not saying anything personal, even if I think it should be harmless (address the code, not the coder).
Hopefully it is OK to say personal things when they are positive: "You did a good job, thanks!" ????