I agree the last sentence by Kent was not needed, but I can totally understand his frustration.
I think it’s a loss for the users at the end on the day.
Reading his comment on LWN, he seems really really tired. A mandatory break doesn’t look like the worst thing which would happen to him. I don’t think he is a bad person.
[citation needed]
In case anyone's looking for that last sentence (quoting Kent here, not my words):
> Get your head examined. And get the fuck out of here with this shit.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/citv2v6f33hoidq75xd2spaqxf7nl5w...
IMHO
Democracy is good governance not a dictatorship of a majority.
A benevolent dictatorship is said to be a most efficient form of government, until it ushers in a non-benevolent dictatorship.
Democracy is not perfect but relatively sustainable in that there is a peaceful mechanism for change and a means of consensus.
Small communities don’t need too many rules but in time as they grow it becomes necessary.
In the short term Ken will have to wait for the time out to end, so a loss for sure.
On balance the future is bigger than the present so suffering today for a better future is utilitarian.
And there are a lot of sensitive folk who have been scared off of communities by what they saw. In this thread a couple have commented about the pre CoC community, that they would have contributed but for the fear of getting barked at.
As a younger dev I bailed on some IRC communities after getting weirdly threatened.
Frustration after being very patient with one’s donated time and feeling unreciprocated can lead to frayed nerves and in the short term being rude is brief and often effective - so it is very understandable that this sort of thing will arise.
Good to discuss how we handle these difficult situations of onboarding newbies without scaring some of the lurking next generation of devs.
As a headline this penalty seems harsh, but efforts were made to mediate before the committee made the ruling and proved unsuccessful.
This process is defining the future culture of the kernel code community and it is widely accepted that it should be less toxic and more welcoming and akin to what is expected in a professional context where most devs also function and also have to patiently onboard new developers.
There may be room for improvement of the process, for instance, like in many settings the burden of patient onboarding may need to fall on a community process with an onboarding ramp that doesn’t fall only on the shoulders of those accepting patches.
As a community it behooves us to step in earlier and help new devs polish their contributions before submission.
Especially if we see a fraustration brewing, step in and offer code review to the new developers, who want to contribute, but need some guidance.
Often just guidance about the right questions to ask and where and how to find the answers oneself before asking.
The eternal September doesn’t have to be so, offering to help with onboarding a new dev helps everyone.
“professional environments” have flaws - and can be as you assert dehumanisating - more so when orgs are large, and rules enforced blindly or with ‘zero tolerance’.
I meant it as a proxy for a forum where mutual respect and civility are theoretically expected.
Although in the real world not always present.
I agree that rules can potentially be overbearing and curtail free expression but also protect and nurture expression where it is suppressed by an unruly culture.
As in most things, it is difficult to find a good balance and a healthy community is self-regulating.