“We assumed every user had an IQ greater than 42”

A perfect example of how NOT to write an issue ticket, but also an example of how NOT to respond as well. If it offends you, just close the ticket and if you're feeling generous refer the reporter to a resource on how to write an effective ticket. It would have taken less time than writing 2 angry paragraphs which have the side-effect of discouraging people with genuine questions from even thinking about asking lest they be called "dumb".

I don't see a problem here, the issue-reporter was condescending, and they received the same back.

His problem, such as it is, could have been resolved with a quick search, but instead he decided to write a snark-ridden ticket.

Users like this should be encouraged to ask for a refund, then ignored.

Agreed that the issue opener is a bit of a troll (and antirez: don't feed the trolls!), but let's step back a moment and separate the content from the subtext.

Context: Error messages reach users, by their nature, when something has gone wrong. It's likely that, in that moment, the user's amygdala has started sounding an alarm that the brain's prediction about the outcome of an operation did not come true. It is, quite literally, an emotional moment. A feeling of vulnerability, even if only for an instant, is the first and most profound response when a user encounters an error. Humans further tend to anthropomorphize the systems they interact with - a natural shortcut the brain takes to understand a system that seems to have intelligence - and a cold, unforgiving error message lashing out in a moment of vulnerability seems almost malevolent.

Content: If error messages considered the momentary mental state of a user when they're feeling raw from their expectation not being met - the error resulting from their action - they would be more helpful to the user, and allow them to be self-sufficient, which increases their feeling of well-being and satisfaction with a system. As developers, we can "be right" or we can "be happy" - sure, it's right to say something went wrong. But it's happy when the friendliness of an error message means that a user can resolve an error condition without having to submit an issue to the help desk.

Ah this takes me back. Many years ago, contributed to a few Ruby libraries, life was good. Then Rails hit their first RC post 0.13, and a new set of self-important developers rocked up, demanding all of your attention to add their demanded features, to receive their abuse as to why something worked as documented, and not how they thought it should.

There is a cadre of developers, and I use the word lightly, who Willl rock up and suck the fun out of your open source projects. Beware of them!

Just out of curiosity (after reading antirez's comment here), I took a look at wwat's github contributions:

  https://github.com/wwat?tab=contributions&period=monthly
  https://github.com/wwat?tab=activity

wwat seems to be a troll, but I have an assistant called Puppet whose IQ is clearly below 42.

Puppet has confusified such things in three entirely different ways that I can recall right now, but I have a feeling that Antirez would direct his snark at me, not at Puppet. (IMO Puppet and the program being configured shared the blame.)

Programs such as redis should not assume that their operators have perfect insight and use only bug-free tools.

The reporter seems to be a troll. Quick look at his activity shows that most of his comments are snarky and ill-mannered like the one here

The reporter may be a troll, but the response was childish. I haven't used Redis, but this puts me off going near it.

Another textbook example of the toxicity of the open source "community".

Shocking news - half the population is BELOW average IQ