IMHO the best attitude ist to filter out abuse by keeping in mind that they are talking to their own anger, and keep the bits that matter.

p5p's goal isn't to build the finest, most technically excellent, most advanced piece of software at any point in time.

p5p's goal is to build something that lasts.

A handful of features have been delayed or backed out before being released in stable form or even removed because they threatened the stability of the language, the integrity of the CPAN, or the stability of enough code in the wild that they presented an untenable risk to the future of Perl.

Technically good patches have been rejected because they don't have sufficient documentation or tests or comments such that they risk maintenance problems for the future of the codebase.

In much the same way, allowing abuse and vitriol that is completely unnecessary and completely optional and completely controllable threatens the integrity of the project itself. Multiple contributors have walked away from p5p for short and long periods of time because of abuse from Reini and Marc.

p5p is optimizing for something that lasts, and requiring contributors to avoid personal attacks is part of that process.