[anon3_]

> And what if I did? Learning to ignore things that could unreasonably sour your mood is a valuable skill in life anyway. Life itself doesn't really have a code like proposed.

De-escalated depending on the context of the situation.

Code of Conduct defines problems and could turn anything funny, innocent, etc. into an excuse to ruin someone's life.

9/10 times it's someone who doesn't program (an Adria Richards, Shanley Kane) who will be attacking someone who actually contributes.

[cmsj]

-1. Implies lines of code is the only possible contribution one can make.

[13thLetter]

What do the Shanley Kanes of the world contribute?

[anon3_]

Do you expect everyone to water down thoughts with a bullet-point list of qualifiers to have a point?

The people causing the social outrage debacles, often can't program. They're complete outsiders who think they can use social ideas and useful idiots as a vehicle for their own benefit.

Many QAers and PM's can or have programmed some, at one point, or else they wouldn't understand the domain of the problem.

Most of the trouble crowd tend to be social marketers and so-called "evangelists" on twitter.

They're not programmers.

These people leading the vanguard of your code of conduct movements - they're not even really tech. They're happy when you invent these new job positions to give them a paycheck.

[cmsj]

You seem to be continuing to operate under the assumption that only people who can code, are capable of contributing to a project.

There are so many things that can be done to contribute to a project, that don't involve writing a single line of code. Testing, evangelism, documentation, support, etc, etc.

Why should attempting to improve the culture of a project, be any different?