The code of conduct push was a transparent game of social aggression — an attempt to shift open source power dynamics in favor of:
(1) Allowing social activists, who could not acquire institutional power on the basis of their own technical merit, to co-opt open source institutions for their own aims and to extract resources. See also the contributor covenant, DEI consultants, et al.
(2) Securing the necessary power structures to enforce the beliefs of their particular vein of progressive political activism.
In my experience being very involved with a few large projects that were pressured into adopting a code of conduct, the historically most toxic and socially aggressive personalities in the project became the biggest proponents of adopting a code of conduct, engaging in bad faith and with extreme social aggression to tear down any detractors, hiding behind their newfound righteousness as a defense.
Are you also satisfied with the diversity within the project communities that you contribute to?
Anyone who needs a document to understand what is acceptable and what isn't is not someone who you want in any project.
Answering reasonable requests for clarity in a community with mockery and derision doesn't sound like a very welcoming place.
