Hacker News Reader

Dead on. I found myself cringing at your suggestion that pg has said something ridiculous, and I like to think I'm less affected by status than most.

I would tolerate it because I think that's how he needs to act to keep the project from becoming a POS. Being nice/courteous often gets you design by committee results.

Also, I might be swayed by his credibility, but what he's saying sounds reasonable.

I don't think anyone has really argued about WHAT he said. It's just a question of how he says it. There are many, much politer (and probably more effective) ways to say the same thing.

Well that was part of what I was saying - being able to reprimand effectively is part of what makes him a good leader for this thing. Being excessively polite and sugar coating everything doesn't instill the same desire to do things right next time. I think he's acting exactly as he needs to.

You're creating a strawman -- there's a big gulf between "being rude" and "being excessively polite." On top of that, I've never seen any proof that suggests that leaders who create shame & embarrassment & anger work better than leaders who inspire.

>"(Which is a big reason why you don't see much criticism of pg here, or when you do, it's very respectful, vs other authors, even when he writes something ridiculous.)"

If you think someone is being ridiculous why don't you say something.

People don't do it because it is counter productive. Respected people have their supporters. Unless you first bury your argument in adequately respectful terms it will get downvoted. Regardless of content.

You cannot say "The Linus rant about C++ is just wrong". You need to first blather on about why Linus is a great guy but has his limited perspective and from that perspective he is correct. However there is a world outside of that perspective where he is wrong.

If I posted the Linus rant on C++ I'd just be called an idiot. Nobody would worry about my perspective because, to my knowledge, I don't have any supporters to appease.

It is just politics. It affects tech communities as much as anywhere else. People get invested in their side. If you challenge their side then you must be sneaky about it.

>You cannot say "The Linus rant about C++ is just wrong". You need to first blather on about why Linus is a great guy but has his limited perspective and from that perspective he is correct.

You may think that you have to appease people.

If you posted "The Linus rant about C++ is just wrong" then I would down vote you. Why is it wrong, why is it a rant, what's wrong about it - that's what gets my vote.

I thought we were building a Brave New World here away from political double-speaking and ass-licking and endless regurgitation of memes. Please don't give in.

I have, often. Why would you think I hadn't? You must not have looked at my comment history.

Here's an example from the first page of my comment history. Me responding to pg: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2342860

>"Why would you think I hadn't?"

You said so.

>>"those high status people make which are NOT credible themselves will be accepted, or only gently rebuffed"

If you spoke up then your story of 'people with particular status not being challenged at all' was lacking. It's probably a form of hyperbole but it was your evidence that I was trusting to make the assumption about your action. I'll try to be more careful.

It's not so much "tolerated" as just a form of abusive willy-waving that powerful people can get away with. If Linus behaved like that in real life with real people he'd likely get punched in the mouth, repeatedly. It's amusing to read him doing it to other people but he is still behaving like a dick.

In real life, he does it with a smile on his face and it's actually quite disarming.

Doubtful. I know people who act much the same way in person, and while tempers occasionally flare, I've never seen it get physical.