The code of conduct, I understand, banned creating an unwelcoming culture through biased behavior. Saying he's in violation of that rule is begging the question

The code of conduct, I understand, banned creating an unwelcoming culture through biased behavior. Saying he's in violation of that rule is begging the question. So I'm not moving the goalposts. They weren't really set in the first place. I'm asking, more or less, if it's fair for a code of conduct (explicit or ad hoc) to make employees responsible for how their words are taken. > It feels pretty different than public speech suppression, which is, in contrast, widely considered unacceptable. It's worse when governments do it because it's hard to change countries if you want your freedom to express yourself. But it's still an undue burden to have to switch jobs or even careers.