But, part of the reaction that led to the fork included people specifically saying the TSC hid behind the Code of Conduct when choosing not to remove Vagg from

But, part of the reaction that led to the fork included people specifically saying the TSC hid behind the Code of Conduct when choosing not to remove Vagg from Node. The idea was basically that you should have goals in addition to a CoC, and the CoC is only valid insofar as it helps the project achieve the goals. This sounds reasonable to me on its face. But, I wonder if this is a refinement of how a software project should be governed, or just the latest step in a neverending cat-and-mouse game: We have bad behavior and propose a mechanism to address it. Then the mechanism becomes normalized. Then it's eventually used in a fashion counter to its spirit. So a new one is proposed, wash and repeat. Seems like we're moving from "adopt CoCs to defend against shitlords" to "only shitlords care about the CoC."