[exstudent2]

The problem is that these CoCs are being pushed on open source projects not because there is or was a problem with that project, but simply to push the politics of the CoC authors.

Was there actual bad behavior going on in the PHP project that prompted the CoC to be submitted? In the case of Opal, there wasn't. One of the core contributors said something on his personal Twitter that offended someone, then people came into the project with CoCs demanding his head.

Anyone can fork a project. That's how you deal with a toxic community, not strong arm yourself into a position to judge and oust existing community members and use the media to shame those that oppose you.

[Bahamut]

Forking is an extraordinary measure, and often not practical - that is usually a very poor option.

Personally, I disagree with your approach to dealing with a toxic community. Having done moderation in various forums/chat rooms & now open source for almost 12 years, that's usually an approach that encourages poor behavior through insufficient action. As to a solution, I don't know what would be the best way to prevent it, but I'm not so naive to suggest there is an easy one-sided path to avoid it.

[exstudent2]

The thing is these communities aren't actually toxic. Large open source projects take patches based on merit. Lots of people don't even have human identifiable usernames or avatars on Github and yet get patches accepted.

The real toxic behavior that's been happening in open source over the past 5 or so years is the influx of non-developers forcing their political causes into projects and distracting from actual development while bringing negative media attention to OSS via clickbait/ragebait friendly stories.

[thescribe]

I think you stated that better than I ever could.

I perceive a code of conduct as colonization, and the arguments/drama as a beachhead.