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?
It’s not a few. They’re primarily a tool for bad actors to secure institutional power.
However, even if we take the surface-level arguments for a code of conduct in good faith, the entire concept is rooted in the premise that a healthy community arises out of strictly codifying social norms and permissible beliefs, imbuing a central, unaccountable authority with the power to police and enforce those norms, and treating dissension with this approach as a moral failing in of itself.
> Are you also satisfied with the diversity within the project communities that you contribute to?
I don’t know how to answer that question; can you define “diversity” for me?
What personal attributes should I poll from all contributors to measure their diversity? Do you have a score sheet I can use? What does it mean if our “diversity score” is too low? What does that have to do with a code of conduct?
Forums have long had rules, spoken or unspoken. Making them more explicit is helpful IME.
No, every project needs to be completely homogeneous. All members should be interested in creating the best piece of software they can. Anyone who doesn't agree with this goal should be removed from the project.
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.
