[LexiMax]

They don’t.

I have been away from hacker news for about 2 to 3 years and quite frankly I am shocked that this place is still having this same tired argument whereas outside it seems to be an accepted fact of life that having rules surrounding the conduct of project participants is in fact a good thing.

[rgoulter]

> outside it seems to be an accepted fact of life that having rules surrounding the conduct of project participants is in fact a good thing.

I think this talks past concerns.

"Just kick out the rude people" is probably a good thing. "Just kick out the people the admins don't like" is probably a bad thing (or at least isn't as impartial as the former).

With sections like "In addition, violations of this code outside these spaces may affect a person's ability to participate within them" it really seems the intention of the rules goes above/beyond "rules for the space where project participants communicate in".

[LexiMax]

> I think this talks past concerns.

That is intentional, as I believe that these discussions attract rules lawyers who I feel are missing the point.

If the people running the project enforce rules in bad faith, a CoC like the Contributors Code of Conduct is not materially different from an informal list of bullet-point rules, or even an tacit "Don't be a jerk."

[A4ET8a8uTh0]

I don't know anything about your social circles, but my experience suggests that people learned to mostly ignore it until it happens to touch them. Until that point they just indicate their real thoughts in private groups. The argument repeats itself here, because the forum is pseudo-anonymous and lends itself to a 'private group' image despite not really being one.

<< conduct of project participants is in fact a good thing.

Is it though?

[krona]

> it seems to be an accepted fact of life

Isn't that the problem? Accept it. Don't ask questions, or else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralistic_ignorance

[LexiMax]

> Isn't that the problem?

The problem is that the specific phrase "Code of Conduct" has been dragged into a culture war. And if the problem is the parlance, the solution is to just call it something different, like "Conduct Policy", "Rules", or something similar.

It might seem trite, but in my experience using a different name seems to shut off the part of some folks brain who automatically assume said rules will be enforced in bad faith.

[hajile]

Your assertion here that a code of conduct could get dragged into a culture war directly contradicts your previous assertion that there is no war outside of HN.

Rules getting enforced in bad faith as people coalesce power in their sphere is a story as old as human history. Why would you argue that we have an exception in this case?

[LexiMax]

> Your assertion here that a code of conduct could get dragged into a culture war directly contradicts your previous assertion that there is no war outside of HN.

Whoops, ya got me! :)

In all seriousness, there's no contradiction. The phrase "Code of Conduct" was part of a culture war, but in my experience the conversation outside of places like Hacker News has shifted significantly in recent years. Reading this thread was like stepping into a time machine, and not in a pleasant or nostalgic way.