> Respect that people have differences of opinion and that every design or implementation choice carries a trade-off and numerous costs. There is seldom a right answer.
> Please keep unstructured critique to a minimum. If you have solid ideas you want to experiment with, make a fork and see how it works.
I am not "anti-CoC" but I do see how the particular wording of this one could be interpreted to silence pretty much any technical discussion that someone doesn't like.
I think many in the rust community would feel the opposite. Technical conversations, especially tough ones, are far easier when you come in with some enforced civility. More people can contribute their differing technical opinions, not fewer.
Not as a doctor, but as software engineer, I teach programming to autistic people that work in the field and are hired because they are autistic, not despite it.
This particular company looks for them, trains them and put them to work on software projects, just like any other software house would do.
One thing they are often bad at is "enforced civility" not because they are uncivil people, but because their though process is different from ours and forcing them to adhere to some rigid form of presenting opinions that has no other use than enforcing a rule just for the sake of it, bores them in the best of cases, makes them angry in others, but makes uncomfortable in general.
You shouldn't decide how people in a community interact with the community, you should value their contributions and just that.
Civility can be enforced of course, but post-facto, after further investigation.
Doing it preemptively in the COC sounds bad to me.
But I could be wrong.
BTW I have interacted with Rust community and have been downloaded every time I've said something on the line of "maybe it's not the silver bullet"
I don't understand why an autistic person would be incapable of expressing a technical issue in a way that isn't sexist/racist, etc, which is basically 99% of compliance with a CoC.
Can you be specific?