I don't think many here are arguing that Ruby is particularly interesting technology-wise. Amongst languages, well, it isn't particularly. But the baseless FUD about the "culture" or the "community" is unnecessary.
Its driven from the top, largely because most mature programmers that would provide a counter to community immaturity have no reason or need to use Ruby.
Things like "the [whatever] community is toxic-at-best" or "I don't relish the notion of [whatever] culture" are opinions that in Ruby's case are based on the behavior of a minority. It's like if people say all C developers are "fat bearded men." Quite a few are, but it's an unhelpful generalization.
If the Ruby community had a general atmosphere or a policy of encouraging sexist or unprofessional behavior, I'd let these remarks slide. But it doesn't. The articles and rants that make it to HN are usually the controversial parts because that's more likely to get votes on social voting sites like HN, alas.
And unsurprisingly, Linux is a terrible overall example of quality kernel development and design.
> If the Ruby community had a general atmosphere or a policy of encouraging sexist or unprofessional behavior, I'd let these remarks slide. But it doesn't.
Except that the only times I've ever had to deal with (or hear of, third-hand) a general atmosphere of sexist, unprofessional behavior in technology has been in relation to the startup community in general, and the Ruby community in particular.