With Linux and git being probably the most widely adopted open source software projects ever, it would be a valid argument that Linus's approach is by historical proof "the best way".
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but that isn't a logical fallacy. A logical fallacy is "A misconception resulting from flaw in reasoning, or a trick or illusion in thoughts that often succeeds in obfuscating facts/truth."[1] "Selection bias" isn't a recognized logical fallacy, in logical reasoning. "Selection bias" is a statistical bias in sampled data.
They put forth a premise, "With Linux and git being probably the most widely adopted open source software projects ever"
Then an inference, "Linus's approach is historical proof"
And a conclusion, "is the best way [to review code]".
Assuming we can accept the premise as true, you're left to attack the inference (whether or not Linus's approach is historical proof). You may disagree with the conclusion, but calling out a logical argument as a logical fallacy, and using that to dismiss the conclusion, is itself, a logical fallacy called a "fallacy fallacy"[2]
I understand why it could be selection bias. Let's say there are 100 open source projects with openly hostile communication. Only Linux succeeds. You can't point to Linux as proof that hostile communication results in success based on that 1/100 chance.
Similarly you can't just use a single anecdote to prove anything either.
I agree that the argument could be expressed better, but I personally understood the intention.