You might not like it, but it might be true; we don't actually know for sure. What we do know, is that someone with Linus' personality and character traits is the person who did get this monumental thing accomplished for the betterment of the world.
Until Jimmy-never-says-anything-mean does the same, we won't have a useful counterexample to shift the evidence toward your preference.
If you can’t create something without hurting people then don’t create it.
I wish the world were that simple.
If you accomplish anything, someone is going to be jealous or insulted or angry for some reason or another. And if you do nothing, the world goes to hell in a hand basket because no problems are solved.
I'm glad the guy is taking some time off. I have nothing but respect for his conclusion here and how he is handling it.
But the reality is that if accomplish anything whatsoever in the world, someone will come up with some reason to hate on you for it.
Sorry, I wasn't defending Linus at all, and I would not behave as he did. I was just saying that him changing his behavior doesn't prove anything about successful management techniques. Of course I'm not pro assholes :)
I was merely trying to make the point that if one measures the success of a manager by only what is produced and not by how people are managed then one made the same mistake Linus did.
This is quite complicated. Primarily, the measurable bit of a manager's performance is what's produced. If you start measuring people's emotions then that's going to be very hard to quantify.
Let's say that your company is trying to revolutionarize transportation by breaking the monopoly of ICE engines and replacing them with electric motors. What's the compromise you can allow yourself if there's a conflict between your employees' life and emotions and your company's success? If hundreds of people get totally burned out working for you but you help millions of children growing up with less pollution, then is that acceptable?
It isn't always true that you can have your cake and eat it as well. I don't know the right solution, but it's definitely not a simple that "produce great output and also make your employees happy" -- there are countless situations where these conflict. Sadly.
Regarding the case in point -- I think Linus' contribution to the world is so overwhelmingly positive that these rants and hurt feelings don't even compare. It'd be better if he didn't do them but this is his character, and nobody knows how this roughness correlates with his perseverance and care about code. (I'm really not saying it does, but it could.)
> If hundreds of people get totally burned out working for you but you help millions of children growing up with less pollution, then is that acceptable?
It may be an acceptable tradeoff, but I wouldn’t say it makes someone a ”good manager”.
If you can’t create something without hurting people then don’t create it.
Yes everyone calling out LT being an asshat has been right, from day 1.