[whorleater]

Because if you take it as a satirization of the adoption of CoC's, it's saying "we don't think CoC's address real problems and we'll do it with a general set of ideals that do nothing to solve problems".

Which ignores the very real problem of harassment in tech.

[TheAceOfHearts]

According to others, the creator is actually a highly religious person. Why are you assuming that it's satire?

[rleigh]

Given the context, I don't think they are mutually exclusive. It could be both a religious text and satirising other CoCs which are essentially religious in their own right.

[whorleater]

Because half the comments in this thread are saying it's satire?

[drb91]

This does not seem like satire in the least. The rules seem more like common sense than anything humorous.

[loktarogar]

Unless there's enforcement, it's useless as a code of conduct.

[rleigh]

Why? Why are people so concerned with "enforcement", which is basically "punishment"?

A code of conduct should be nothing more than a set of guidelines which contributors should aspire to meet. It's not a legal text, and it's not a religious text. We are free participants in projects, not unwilling subjects to be disciplined.

We've gone from projects where one was expected to behave properly, and if not would be politely admonished, and maybe kicked out if this continued over a long period, to this, where the CoC is to be used as a blunt instrument to punish transgressors. It's not an improvement, and I dislike the assumptions of bad faith and requirement for punishment. It's unnecessary, and sets the wrong tone.

[gonvaled]

I have a non-enforceable CoC for you:

"To participate in this community, you need to kill three people by Sunday"

Simple. Also, I hope you have nothing against it, since it is not enforceable.

[Redoubts]

Seems like all the contributors are on board. What more enforcement do you need?