Well, we are going to disagree about this, so I won't drag this on forever. However I would like to be clear about a couple things.

> And the point of community guidelines isn't to make it the community more inclusive, it's actually to make it more exclusive.

Again, mixing up behaviors and people. The whole point of community guidelines is to serve the community--to include and support a wide range of people, not a wide range behaviors. Certain behaviors just flat out drive people away--that is the very definition of exclusiveness. Being "inclusive" of these toxic behaviors leads to an exclusive culture. The worst, most exclusive cultures are the ones without guidelines, full of bad behavior. Inclusiveness requires curation of behavioral guidelines. Let's not invert the sense of words when convenient for argumentation (e.g. calling community guidelines and behavioral standards "exclusiveness" because they discourage one type of bad behavior but encourage hundreds of other good ones).

> What I find ironic is that under the aegis of "inclusivity and encouraging discussion", you are advocating for exclusion and stifling Linux Torvalds' speech.

This seems to be the crux of the issue. First, it's an exaggeration to say that advocating against using insults and inflammatory language is "stifling" (see above). I actually want Linus to speak his mind--just do so without the anger channel. It's really fucking annoying to some people. Even calling ideas stupid is really fucking annoying to the people who have those ideas. But the worst part is, for every Linus there is, there are dozens, maybe hundreds of people who are going to read something like that and just silently leave. That's a sign of a bad culture. That's toxic right there. And those people who leave are the meek ones who normally wouldn't speak up because they don't want to get the firehose and spotlight pointed right at them. They don't want their ideas called stupid or idiotic or be told they aren't dealing with reality. Those kind of people that actually can be very bright and have very different (and valuable!) perspectives. The kind of people who just disappear and you never notice. And I've met plenty of people like this--if you ever people-managed, you find out hey, this or that person is leaving, and it's because they actually really didn't like being around this group. It's a loss. Most people just don't notice, but their community just got a little worse each time that happens. So you gotta find soft ways to stop it.

At any rate. Generally your comments can be construed as a defense of people that really don't need any defense. That makes it even worse when the community explicitly stands up and defends loud, obnoxious, unnecessary behavior and lionizes these "hotheads". (To be clear, I am not suggesting you are explicitly doing that, it just has that ring to it). Trust me, hotheads need no defense. They need no coddling or encouragement to keep mouthing off. Many hotheads will stick around and annihilate a community, perhaps unconsciously, because it works. They win. So don't defend them. Defending bad behavior is a death spiral, as it sends exactly the wrong message about inclusion, and that's double bad.