When that doesn’t exist, a group’s approach to managing conflict becomes irrelevant because discourse is tainted by a common denominator that doesn’t have much to do with disagreements and more to do with personal respect and decency.

Some of the bigger problems can be dissected into little conversations. I think the way we speak to each other in the tech industry is unique and could probably be examined.

Along those lines, I’d like to see less “this is why you are wrong, period.” and more “this is why you are right, but…” overall in tech discussions. The analytical mind focuses primarily on problem solving and less on promoting positives — but most of us are human and do require a little praise and respect with our serving of cold hard facts.

But really, when it comes to all that, the “no assholes” rule works just fine for me. Bob got that one right for sure.

http://www.hecker.org/writings/handling-disagreements

The key premises are that all significant disagreements are ultimately about personal values (apropos of the video, I think this includes design-related disagreements as well) and that values by their nature are typically strongly held, not shared, and potentially incompatible, particularly in public projects open to anyone. The task is to make the “best” decisions possible while preserving overall group cohesion and avoiding destructive feuds and splits.