I think this email underscores something people miss when discussing Linus's communication style.
It is entirely possible, as we see here, to convey the criticality of something without crossing over into personal attacks.
It is entirely possible, as we see here, to convey the criticality of something without crossing over into personal attacks.
Absolutely.
...
Convey to the intended recipient, with his inevitable personal/emotional/etc. attachments to the topic, in such a way that it takes the intended effect?
A pending question-of-fact, and one that can only be answered very indirectly and in the long run.
Heck, if the answer really is "no", then it's possible we may never know! (until the NSA pwns us all, or at least pwns the subset of us who didn't kowtow to whoever the central socio-econo-political authority of that era will be)
That depends on the context. When you're talking about changing ingrained behaviors, emotional shock and awe can definitely be necessary and the shortest, most painless path to resolution.
the underlying incorrect assumption is that everyone will do the right thing, if only nicely and logically talked to. This is not true and obvious to anyone with experience managing large amounts of people, especially so when firing is not an easy option.
I've yet to see abusive management tactics work in the long term. It might work in the short term, but people with the means will take it as a signal to jump ship because no adult is going to accept abuse if they don't have to.
I've heard your exact sentiment echoed by people who aspire towards management, and it always comes across as a weird power trip fantasy.
Like I said, depends on the context. Being mean has it's place, as does being nice. Those are the extremes and the Lions share in the middle is non-emotional transactionalism.
This sort of cold-blooded rational takedown is way more effective.