[sph]

Code of conducts are a waste of time. Trolls won’t read it, well-behaved people don’t need to be told how to behave well. It’s not like there are CoCs out there that grant you specific rights others don’t: there is no CoC that says, for example, it is fine to harass people or be a racist idiot. So they’re all a variation of:

  Rule 1: don’t be a ****

  Rule 2: basically rule 1 but with more words

Then why do you need a code of conduct at this point. Not being a **** to other people is an unspoken rule that applies everywhere in life, online and offline.

CoCs simply exist because there is a large contingent of people that really do love making and enforcing rules.

[mariusor]

The way I understand the necessity for CoCs is not to tell people how to behave, but to have a clear path to understanding why some people get removed or denied contributing to a project. It's easier to say "your behaviour contravenes our CoC" than "I don't like the way you're behaving".

[sph]

I guess then it’s a cultural thing about avoiding confrontation, because to me there is nothing wrong to confront someone when they’re being a dick. No need to point at some rules, it’s self-evident and the project maintainers should be able to boot people that cannot behave.

[mariusor]

I didn't mean it in that way, but people think having a codified set of rules makes it look less arbitrary and less of an abuse of privilege when they decide to boot someone.

I'm in your camp to be honest, as a maintainer I feel like I need no other justification than "I don't like you" for refusing someone access to my project.