@Viss @jerry Pretty sure I'm missing context here, but there is a barrier to entry to security. Proving your skill. You either find a vulnerability or you don't. You either catch an APT or you don't.

If you want a barrier of entry to voicing opinion that's a different story. I'd argue that it's problematic though.

I'd argue the underlying issue is the difficulty of evaluating credibility, and that it isn't specific to the world of security at all.

@wikiresearch How do they define toxic? I think most people would call Torvald's comments "toxic", but also warranted and merit based.

Would harsh criticisms be considered toxic?
And if so, is it always negative that contributors leave after "toxic" comments?

A threshold of 0.8 on a score from an API just doesn't really clarify what toxic is.

Did I miss anything in the paper that clarifies that?

@dgl interesting talk. Never thought of looking into `less` for this.

I also didn't consider mitigating this on the shell's level. Although the task of avoiding a parser differential with most terminals might be... uhm... interesting.