Comment by colechristensen
4 years ago
I think so. With a large project I think a realist attitude that raises to the level of mean when there’s bullshit around is somewhat necessary to prevent decay.
If not you get cluttered up with bad code and people there for the experience. Like how stackoverflow is lost to rule zealots there for the game not for the purpose.
Something big and important should be intimidating and isn’t a public service babysitter...
It feels like a corollary of memetic assholery in online communities. Essentially the R0 [0] of being a dick.
If I have a community, bombarded by a random number of transient bad actors at random times, then if R0 > some threshold, my community inevitably trends to a cesspool, as each bad actor creates more negative members.
If I take steps to decrease R0, one of which may indeed be "blunt- and harshness to new contributors", then my community may survive in the face of equivalent pressures.
It's a valid point, and seems to have historical support via evidence of many egalitarian / welcoming communities collapsing due to the accumulation of bad faith participants.
The key distinction is probably "Are you being blunt / harsh in the service of the primary goal, or ancillary to the mission?"
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_reproduction_number
> It's a valid point, and seems to have historical support via evidence of many egalitarian / welcoming communities collapsing due to the accumulation of bad faith participants.
Could you provide references to some of this historical support?
Kinda a silly example, but several subreddits that started out with the aim of making fun of some subject (i.e. r/prequelmemes and the Star Wars prequels, or r/the_donald and then Presidential candidate Donald Trump) were quickly turned into communities earnestly supporting the initial subject of parody.
2 replies →
I'm not sure why you think you have to be mean to avoid bad code. Being nice doesn't mean accepting any and all contributions. It just means not being a jerk or _overly_ harsh when rejecting.
You can create a strict, high functioning organization without being an asshole. Maintaining high standards and expecting excellence isn't an exercise in babysitting; it's an exercise in aligning contributors to those same standards and expectations.
You don't need to do that by telling them they're garbage. You can do it by getting them invested in growth and improvement.
that is depend on who you are asking. if i am taking "no nonsense" aproach then some people are having no problem. but other people, include especialy woman, are say that it is not "nice" and that there is some problem even if it is neither "mean".
also here we are seeing persons are having no interest in "growth and improvement", they are not even creating the good faith contributions to project.
> Like how stackoverflow is lost to rule zealots there for the game not for the purpose.
Like?
Honest questions getting downvoted, closed for being too broad, duplicates or just "Wrong" in the eyes of overzealous long time members
There's nothing wrong with duplicates
If they weren't doing it, then quality of SO would decrease for all of us.
It's in our interest to have strict mods on SO
6 replies →