Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [ 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)

Ben Hutchings
2013-07-17T03:16:44Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1977 bytes --]

On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 20:02 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > In fact, even in the pull request that's referenced here, Linus, you
> > were polite but firm in your first two responses. When you're perfectly
> > capable of doing that, why spoil it by adding insults?
>
> Umm. Notice how the "Joseph" I replied to had deleted all the comments he wrote?

Sorry, that completely escaped me.

> That should tell you something. I smacked down a troll.
>
> If I was polite to you all those years ago, and I was polite but firm
> in the two first responses, please give me credit for when I smack
> somebody down. There may be a reason for it. The fact that the person
> deleted his messages (or github deleted them for him - I have no idea
> what their comment policy is) and you cannot see that context any more
> online should not make you think that I suddenly went crazy.

Unfortunately, it seems I'm not the only one to be confused by this.

> Btw, since I get the github messages in email too, I have a copy.
> Joseph replied to those "polite but firm" messages where I explained
> exactly *why* I don't want to bother with github pull requests with
> this gem:
>
> "I did not realizes that Linus' shit does not stink. Thanks for
> clearing that up..."
>
> Quite frankly, I think I was quite polite enough. Exactly *because* I
> had been polite but firm before that injection.
>
> The fact is, I don't suffer fools nicely. I call it like I see it, and
> I called him a moron for entering the discussion with a totally
> content-free comment.
>
> Feel free to disagree. Maybe you see some value in the troll comment?

Indeed not.

> And I somehow suspect that your message that I replied to back in 1999
> was somehow more relevant? Yes? No?

Yes.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Humans are not rational beings; they are rationalising beings.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]