by Katherine Noyes
As a child of two academic parents and
with a fairly significant academic background myself, I was brought
up to believe that there are no stupid questions.
Instead, I was nurtured by the belief
that questions are a good thing, helping as they do to clarify and
refine the common understanding. If a question is a misguided one, I
was trained to believe, the asker would quickly be given to
understand what it was he or she had initially failed to understand.
If, alternatively, it challenged current widespread belief, a
rational discourse would follow whereby the idea (NOT the person who
expressed it, mind you) was examined and evaluated as a possible
motivation for refining current beliefs.
What I am continually amazed to find in
much of the Linux community, however – at least here on Google+ --
is an atmosphere of personal venom and attacks. (Image credit: holytaco.com)
A Poisonous Atmosphere
Case in point: The site Linux
Advocates.
I co-founded this site with Dietrich
Schmitz earlier this year, motivated by the belief that there were
woefully few places in which Linux advocates (which we both are)
could discuss the state of Linux rationally and critically – in
which we're not bound by the agendas of advertisers or others with
irrevocably vested interests.
Neither Dietrich nor I has a vested
interest here. We both love and use Linux, but we're not afraid to
look at it critically or to ask tough questions, much the way
academics do every day in their own respective communities. It is
through objective and clear-eyed critical thinking, after all, that
intellectual progress is made.
It seems, however, that those with
interests in this community can't abide to have objective questions
asked. As the sole Linux-focused writer at PCWorld, I am nothing if
not well-acquainted with the many barbs, jibes and personal attacks
that are typically levied by those with nothing more than hurt pride
to defend them. Fans of Windows and Macs alike have long vented much
frustration through comments on my stories.
What I've seen here on Linux Advocates,
however, has blown all that out of the water.
Gunned Down by the Firehose
A second case in point: After acting as
one of Fuduntu's biggest
cheerleaders (as have
I, incidentally), Dietrich was nothing short of torched with a
firehose for daring to question
the wisdom of the project team's goals following its decision to
shut down the growing distro.
Just to reiterate: In most of the
rational world, asking questions is not a bad thing. At worst, it
gets you a rebuke for being misguided or silly.
Here in the Linux community, however,
it gets you the firehose. Instead of responding rationally to
Dietrich's concerns and comments, those involved either directly or
peripherally have let loose with all they've got, clearly aiming to
drive him out of the Linux community altogether.
Is Progress Possible?
Dietrich has also been sharply
criticized for shutting down comments or commentators on the site,
even when they involved personal attacks and other completely
irrational responses.
To me, this is a very bizarre community
indeed, and I think it casts considerable doubt on the community's
ability to make any progress beyond the scattered conglomeration of
sub-communities it currently comprises. If it's not possible to ask
rational questions or to question the status quo – however
threatening that may be to some – how can progress ever be made?
I know I can say with complete
certainty that both Dietrich and I are rooting for Linux with our
full hearts. Neither one of us uses Windows or Mac, and we couldn't
imagine ever doing so. But when the community shoots us down simply
for asking high-level questions, it's really hard to keep feeling
committed.
Has this just been a fluke occurrence?
Is there really no room for rational discourse in the Linux
community? I await comments from the community itself.
-- Katherine
-- Katherine
