3 ms·

I oppose it for small events. You don't have a code of conduct for a party or a gathering of friends. It's just assumed that if you're not a positive influence

• rexpop 8y ago
  > To me, it just feels too impersonal. This is a relatable criticism. I think you're right that we lose some sense of the carefree, unfettered relating when we pause to articulate our codes of conduct. I, too, yearn for such liberated communities, and cherish them when available. However, I don't think we can, as a society, afford to make assumptions. What's not explicit often exists, as I've tried to illustrate in sibling comments, implicitly and politics—ie the distribution of power amongst individuals—always exist. They're better when they're explicit. Even between only two people! Every relationship should stand on the basis of explicit boundaries and expectations. It's often said that asking and checking such boundaries "kills the mood," and I think you're making a similar argument. The rebuttal is that relationships are much safer, and therefore deeper and valuable, when boundaries are explicit. They're worth it, every time, from 2 individuals to 7 billion. Explicating boundaries might even be a fundamental necessity of relating, in an informative, topological sense.