I also think exactly the same thing of you, given that you think I'm stupid enough to believe that being called a douche is 'constructive criticism'. It doesn't require profanity to insult someone.

If you're offended by the word douche to describe a jerk, then we occupy different cultures.

Similarly, if someone thinks being called a "jerk" is an insult devoid of constructive criticism, then they're likely either intentionally obdurate or they lack the self-awareness to identify their failings.

I'm perfectly aware of my ability to be a douche. I just choose who to be a jerk to. Strangers on the internet: possibly; colleagues I work with: not so much.

I'm not offended by it in the slightest. I swear like a trooper. My issue is that you're trying to pass off a generic insult as 'constructive criticism'. What is insulting is that you think I'm stupid enough to believe it - it's not the words you're using, but the underlying context.

It's either that, or you don't actually understand what constructive criticism is.

I'm probably stupid for starting this up again, but at the top of the thread, in my first comment, before I call Linus a douche, I spend two paragraphs describing what I think the problem is.

If Linus actually read my HN comment and (a) was offended and (b) wanted constructive criticism, he would see that I believe he is poorly socialized for working in a certain (rather popular) type of work environment. That seems to me pretty constructive. Linus would not be suited for a job in diplomacy, or any other type of relationship-intensive enterprise.

Now, if I just said "Linus is a douche," I'd give you your point.

I already regret starting this up again, because you seem to be committed to your point. But WTF, I had 10 minutes to kill before I pick up my kid.