[Deejahll]

The authors mischaracterize the "code of conduct" statement first as a redundant legal system, then as a decree that "spreads guilt onto an entire gender," then as an "overarching act of protection condemning basically every social behavior between men and women."

A code of conduct is none of those things. It is an invitation: "this is how we expect people attending our event to behave; where you find it not so, be assured that your concerns will not be ignored. Here are ways to help the event organizers address conflicts: A, B, C."

There is a legitimate need for this statement to be made.

[rlpb]

It's also really handy to be able to refer to a code of conduct directly to curb inappropriate behaviour. Referring to one gives more power to a direct and immediate request for someone to curb his inappropriate behaviour.

This worked has well for me (I'm male, if it matters) at the one conference I've seen inappropriate (if unintended) behaviour. A shout of "that's inappropriate; we have a code of conduct here; move on to the next slide or get off the stage" worked very well for me.

Using this turns an implied "that's inappropriate [in my opinion]" into a specific and much more powerful "that's inappropriate [according to our rules]".

[saraid216]

Yup. This is exactly how rule of law works. A codified, criticized, and iterated set of demands is more useful than simply having a lone opinion in a mostly egalitarian setting precisely because your opinion isn't alone and you can prove it without asking anyone else to spend social capital.

[baudtack]

Now I'm curious what conference.