> I don't see why promoting inclusiveness and frictionless contribution shouldn't be seen as meritorious activity The question is "who judges" ? A meritocracy

> I don't see why promoting inclusiveness and frictionless contribution shouldn't be seen as meritorious activity The question is "who judges" ? A meritocracy is generally an engineering meritocracy. People who get things done, get more merit. And it's easy to judge who gets things done. No one cares if the contributor is black, blind, gay, trans, politically left or right. They're doing engineering. All other topics are off topic for the engineering project. In contrast, "inclusiveness" is a vague concept. It's hard to judge "inclusiveness". So when the judging happens, it tends to be subjective, and driven by politics, ideology, or emotion. This subject came up on the FreeRADIUS list last year. I made similar points here: http://lists.freeradius.org/pipermail/freeradius-users/2016-February/082389.html http://lists.freeradius.org/pipermail/freeradius-users/2016-... I am actively opposed to most "codes of conduct", for reasons stated in the link. From the main web site http://freeradius.org/list/ http://freeradius.org/list/ --- All mailing lists have a strict code of conduct: The only permitted topic on the list is technical discussion related to FreeRADIUS. Off topic messages will result in a warning. Continued misbehavior will result in the person being unsubscribed from the list, and permanently banned. This code of conduct was defined after many years of experience running the list. It is simple to explain, and simple to enforce. Unlike other codes of conduct, it does not require people to be "inclusive" or "accepting" of certain topics. It requires people to be blind to non-technical topics, as those subjects are explicitly off-topic. --- Such a "code of conduct" is easy to explain, easy to enforce, and easy to judge. No politics, ideology, or emotion get in the way of people doing engineering.