[marssaxman]

It's not the code of conduct document itself which seems harsh and moralistic, but the us-versus-them, tribal-feeling advocacy which accompanies it. The two code-of-conduct documents I have read were so inoffensive I couldn't tell what the point of instituting them was; but right here in this discussion there's a fairly hostile attitude toward people who are not on board with the idea, as though one must either embrace this novel code-of-conduct practice or be labelled a troglodyte. The more I have read today about the purpose of these codes of conduct, the more I like what the people promoting them are trying to do; but I'm still stuck with this feeling that they aren't my people, and don't consider me to be their people, and it's pretty much "do what we say or we think you're an asshole." Which... does not strike me as the most effective way of achieving change. Wouldn't it be more useful to bring people on board by engaging with us and explaining what's going on?