There's a huge difference between abusing people and refusing to coddle them, and I'm not sure this article reflects that very well.
"unless I help create environments where all participants are willing to speak up" is an example of actively trying to appeal to a group of people, not an example of not abusing people. It might be a worthy goal, but let's not use words like "abuse" so lightly.
> abuse newcomers for still being in the process of learning
Project maintainers have a finite amount of available time, and dealing with inexperienced people who are wasting your time, even if they have perfectly good intentions, is simply not practical. To pick on Linus, since he's mentioned in this article, he has no choice except to be an asshole to people who try to add shitty stuff to Linux, because if he didn't scare those people off, he would waste all his time politely turning them away and never get anything done.
I have a few projects I've done over the years that have evidently reached a fair number of people, and I have to ignore probably 90% of the emails and github interactions I receive from people because the requests are often very stupid and unproductive. I can't imagine how bad it must be for a huge project like Linux.
And then, towards the beginning and end of the article, the author gets into stuff like encouraging diversity (not sure what they mean by that) and going to feminist workshops. Maybe that's a good idea for some people, who knows, but not really wanting to spend your time on stuff like that does not mean you are "abusing" contributors in some way. It's a dishonest and dirty rhetorical trick to try to conflate "extensive personal abuse" and failing to sufficiently immerse oneself in the political culture advocated in the article.
Ironically, one of the things that scares me the most about interacting with the open source community is people like this, who demand that you invest time and resources into whatever "inclusive" political ideology they're trying to sell you, or else you're actively harming (abusing!) other people in the community. They try to subvert otherwise productive communities, making politically motivated and technically useless pull requests (e.g. https://github.com/antirez/redis/issues/3185) or institute political rules called things like "codes of conduct" that allow them to exclude people that don't agree with whatever they're advocating under the banner of inclusivity.
"unless I help create environments where all participants are willing to speak up" is an example of actively trying to appeal to a group of people, not an example of not abusing people. It might be a worthy goal, but let's not use words like "abuse" so lightly.
> abuse newcomers for still being in the process of learning
Project maintainers have a finite amount of available time, and dealing with inexperienced people who are wasting your time, even if they have perfectly good intentions, is simply not practical. To pick on Linus, since he's mentioned in this article, he has no choice except to be an asshole to people who try to add shitty stuff to Linux, because if he didn't scare those people off, he would waste all his time politely turning them away and never get anything done.
I have a few projects I've done over the years that have evidently reached a fair number of people, and I have to ignore probably 90% of the emails and github interactions I receive from people because the requests are often very stupid and unproductive. I can't imagine how bad it must be for a huge project like Linux.
And then, towards the beginning and end of the article, the author gets into stuff like encouraging diversity (not sure what they mean by that) and going to feminist workshops. Maybe that's a good idea for some people, who knows, but not really wanting to spend your time on stuff like that does not mean you are "abusing" contributors in some way. It's a dishonest and dirty rhetorical trick to try to conflate "extensive personal abuse" and failing to sufficiently immerse oneself in the political culture advocated in the article.
Ironically, one of the things that scares me the most about interacting with the open source community is people like this, who demand that you invest time and resources into whatever "inclusive" political ideology they're trying to sell you, or else you're actively harming (abusing!) other people in the community. They try to subvert otherwise productive communities, making politically motivated and technically useless pull requests (e.g. https://github.com/antirez/redis/issues/3185) or institute political rules called things like "codes of conduct" that allow them to exclude people that don't agree with whatever they're advocating under the banner of inclusivity.