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

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1374031004.2537.84.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 17 Jul 2013 04:16:44 +0100
From:	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@...ux.intel.com>,
	David Lang <david@...g.hm>,
	ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Olivier Galibert <galibert@...ox.com>,
	stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] How to act on LKML (was: [
 00/19] 3.10.1-stable review)

On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 20:02 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.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.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)