I prefer Linus style - he at least gives the reasons why something is bad idea, why he won't accept some patches etc.
I don't know about PG, but the blog post portrays him as someone who likes to use argumentum ad verecundiam.
He could at least provide list of some startups which had same/similar idea that failed, for further studies. And maybe he did, if so, it wasn't PG fault that the author of blog post picked irrelevant part, that says nothing more than "you're wrong, because I say so".
For me no-filter style is Linus style, and I really like it.
> I prefer Linus style - he at least gives the reasons why something is bad idea, why he won't accept some patches etc.
Yeah. Basically, when Linus flames somebody, the "mean words" are decoration. They don't actually form the meat of the message, which is almost always technical and detailed. If you had an email filter which deleted all nasty words, you'd still get very useful information from one of Linus's flames.