And of course he's Linus and you're a nobody so nobody will ever listen to the other side of the completely subjective "facts"
Saying to someone “your work is not good enough for me” is a subjective statement; whether or not it is honest depends on whether or not it is reflective of the speaker’s beliefs about the quality of the work.
A leader not speaking up when they receive subpar work is dishonest, and it is fundamentally unfair to the person doing the work.
You would either be mistaken if you believed the earth to be flat, or a liar if you didn't.
That also has absolutely nothing to do with your original claim -- that Linus has been "dishonest" because his opinions about technical matters discussed on LKML aren't objective. There is a fundamental difference between stating a fact ("the earth is a sphere") and an opinion ("this work is not up to my standards" or "I do not agree with your approach to solving this problem.")
Note: being rude in expressing their opinions might make a person an asshole, but it does not make them "dishonest."
Thanks for telling me the point I was trying to make. It's very useful -_-'
> There is a fundamental difference between stating a fact and an opinion
There is, but often people mistake their own opinions for facts.
I'm sure Linus knew perfectly it was an opinion and not a fact because when he spoke about the issue we were having at a conference he kinda glossed over the bits that would have made it at least doubtful he was correct.
But of course people who hadn't read the mailing list and had no context had no choice but to believe he was absolutely right and forced to deal with very unreasonable people.
Had he said the full story, nobody hearing him would have thought he was completely right.
I wasn't party to whatever conversation you had with Linus, so I can't comment on your anecdote or if or how it relates to the argument(s) you are trying to make, other than to point out that nobody is 100% objective. That includes you.
Have a nice day.
Truly, you made your decision before reading what I wrote.
"This isn't good enough, your code is sloppy as shit" - you're being an asshole.
"We have a coding standards and conventions round commenting and formatting. I encourage you to rework your patch with that in mind and re-submit it, because at least on cursory examination, your code looks solid."
"Thank you for resubmitting. This is much more in line with what we prefer. Now we'll be able to take advantage of the work you've done to fix this problem."