Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Post History

77%
+5 −0
Q&A A Code of Conduct, dare I say it

I've reviewed the updated CoC, and overall it looks pretty good. I like the basic and short approach, and I like it being based on common sense and sound logic. I feel it's what every CoC should st...

posted 5y ago by Thomas Myron‭

Answer
#1: Initial revision by user avatar Thomas Myron‭ · 2019-12-30T02:19:02Z (almost 5 years ago)
I've reviewed the updated CoC, and overall it looks pretty good. I like the basic and short approach, and I like it being based on common sense and sound logic. I feel it's what every CoC should strive for. I just found a few wording issues which I'd like to bring up: 

>This Code of Conduct applies to all uses of this website, and any physical meetups of its community. 

I'm not sure about that last half. This is the CoC *for this website*. Disregarding whether we legally can extend the CoC for the website to the lives of its members beyond the website, I doubt we *should* extend it in such a way. If people from this community meet up in RL, it's down to them how to act. When they come to the site, they have to abide by the CoC, but beyond the website, we have no say in the matter, and neither should we. I would remove the last half of that line. 

>We will not tolerate harassment of anyone based on any aspect of their personal identity

Two things here. One, I would add the word *intentional* before harassment. In the guideline above it, we mention that accidents happen. Accidental harassment can certainly happen. I don't want to see this harassment guideline turn into a weapon for people who decide they are being 'harassed' by someone they don't like (obviously we aren't at that point yet, but in the distant future...). 

Second, I would remove the whole second half of the guideline. We will not tolerate intentional harassment of anyone. Period. I don't care *why* someone is being intentionally harassed. It should be enough that it's happening. Keeping the second half could lead to problems (again, not now, but possibly later) where someone might claim they weren't harassing based on personal identity, and then could make a big deal out of us taking issue with their actions. 

Then again, I might be reading way too much into this. But that's what I noticed on a first pass-through.