[lern_too_spel]

What a strange way of looking at it. At any functioning company, toxic employees get fired because the cost of them pushing out other employees is usually higher than the cost of firing them. Open source projects do not hire and fire people but do have the ability to censure toxic contributors.

I know nothing about this particular case, but the general idea of moderating contributors to a project is not wacky as you seem to believe and predates the existence of distributed open source development.

[poszlem]

Except in those situations you never weight the amount of people you lose by adding a significant level of "cultural oversight" to a project. I actively avoid projects that spend a lot of time talking about "inclusivity" because to me it's a symptom of a (ironically) toxic environment full of people looking for drama (I am an ethnic and sexual minority myself in case someone wants to throw privilege in my face). The end result is that you replace one group of people with another group of people, you push away some to gain some. Except people like myself are rarely mentioned when there is a discussion about toxic environments.

[tharne]

> I actively avoid projects that spend a lot of time talking about "inclusivity" because to me it's a symptom of a (ironically) toxic environment full of people looking for drama

100%. I do the exact same thing, for the exact same reasons.

If you see a code of conduct that reads like a political manifesto, that's a red flag, regardless of the particulars of the politics expressed.

[vegai_]

And at many seemingly functioning companies, toxic executives keep their jobs as long as they're keeping a large enough amount of their peers happy.