[RNCTX]

> For example, I saw one where a maintainer politely declined to give the Foundation access privileges required to enforce the Code of Conduct, instead saying that the maintainers would enforce it themselves. Sorry, but I don't think any foundation could accept that. One of many reasons for joining a foundation is that it gives contributors confidence that there is a CoC backed up by an independent organisation, and that can be enforced even (especially) against powerful members of the community such as project maintainers - potentially even all of a project's maintainers. This is one of many ways that Foundations help build contributor confidence, which is one of the major benefits for a project of joining a foundation, and all of them rest on the credibility of the foundation to act as a circuit breaker and assert some kind of control should dire circumstances crop up.

Which is why those people in your hypothetical rightfully see CoCs as poison-pills meant to silently transfer ownership from themselves as owners/founders/copyright holders to corporate "contributors."

To which the obvious response is "if you want to own my assets, buy them, stop tip-toeing around contracts and trying to get them on the cheap."