Why Is The Arch Linux Community So toxic?
- Thread starter GuestSneezeOS Offcial
- Start date
- Status
Toxic superiority is nothing new. Back in the day, when Linux was just getting started, if you dared to ask a question on a Unix site, you had to wear flame retardant underwear. Of course, no real forums back then, so Usenet was the communications means.
And totally uncensored and rarely with moderators, so the sarcasm and abuse could get really dark for bothering REAL sysops with questions about some dinky Unix wannabe.
And totally uncensored and rarely with moderators, so the sarcasm and abuse could get really dark for bothering REAL sysops with questions about some dinky Unix wannabe.
Brickwizard
Well-Known Member
Ah yes, I remember it well [late 1990's]
CaffeineAddict
Well-Known Member
You see, in this world it's two kinds of people, those who use Arch and those who don't lmao
If you don't use Arch you dig lol.
super_user_do
Active Member
I think that must be because toxic people tend to concentrate into things that require a lot of time and effort in the tech world. The good people are here my bro
My opinion still is if you try Arch or Gentoo you should expect to get your hand held every step of the way. I don't find that toxic at all since the audience of Arch and Gentoo are still advanced users and users with a DIY mindset. However the archinstall script does make installing Arch a lot easier but if something breaks you should still know how to where to look and how to fix it yourself. If you can't then EndeavourOS, Garuda, CachyOS or Manjaro is probably the better distribution for you.
MzQ1NjExN2
Member
I use Debian by the way. :-D
Yup. Me too. Bookworm 12. Rock solid and seldom any toxic conversations because there is seldom anything to ask questions about. "Just works" is boring and I like it that way.
CaffeineAddict
Well-Known Member
True, there is no toxic conversion but moderation is far beyond for any average user to feel like at home.
I prefer balance of toxicity and freedom of expression, too much of one or the other and you feel like it's not place for you.
Either you're nerd who knows everything and fit the toxic board, or otherwise you're total noob and nobody attacks you for that.
Both are equally bad.
Yeah, in the 90's and early 2000's a lot of the internet was like that. I remember using audiogalaxy, which was a music pirating website. It was so user friendly and simple, you'd think what they were doing was legal. They had music from so many popular bands.
Each artist had a simple html message board section at the bottom. Naturally, people would talk about the bands, but it was never frowned upon or punished to go way off topic. People would have long discussions about sex and racism. I remember there was this nazi troll guy who would post ASCII swastikas out of the blue and only message in caps. Hoards of angry comments directed at the person would fallow, it was too easy for this person.
So, the way I look at moderation is this: if it weren't for the massive amounts of spam, the occasional child porn, and the occasional animal torture video (yes, in the early days of youtube, they had a problem with sick stuff like that), then moderation wouldn't really be necessary. The general trash internet traffic would exclude a lot of people from wanting to spend their time being addicted to it, which has plusses and minuses.
sempterobit
New Member
I ve been running Endeavour on my Dell for a few years. Just have to find the sweet spot.
I'm locking this Thread as the OP has not been back to it since posting it beginning April.
Thanks to those who provided valid contributions.
Wizard
Thanks to those who provided valid contributions.
Wizard
- Status
