>I'm talking beyond my expertise here - I've never been involved in a CoC argument, but I have witnessed a lot of trolling If by "argument" you mean "flame-war

>I'm talking beyond my expertise here - I've never been involved in a CoC argument, but I have witnessed a lot of trolling If by "argument" you mean "flame-war", then I suppose I'm right there with you. I've seen many, but participated in zero. Still, I think I've observed some regularities. One such regularity is that flame-wars and CoC-trolling almost always take place in communities that treat their CoCs as some sort of constitution, and believe these conflicts should be resolved in a simili-court-of-law. This is why I continue to oppose CoCs on the grounds that they're ideological tools, in practice. In my estimation, the whole point of pushing CoCs on open source projects is to get them to think in terms of legal process, at which point they can be harassed into behaving a certain way. This is all done on the false premise that internet communities should be run like first-world democracies. >Even I have seen the "you handled this one way last month, why are you treating this guy differently today?" arguments. >I imagine if you're willing to discuss your decisions at all, you're going to be forced to argue technicalities. That's the brilliant thing - you're not forced to argue technicalities. In fact, you're not forced to give any explanation (though that's rarely the best policy, in practice). This isn't a court of law. Anyway this is just ... like ... my opinion, man. Others can disagree with me and still be reasonable. As I said in another comment, I don't run any popular OSS communities, but if I do, I don't think I'll use a CoC. And I don't think that will prevent me from enforcing good behavior. (P.S.: I've just reread this comment and it struck me as a bit abrasive and argumentative. I've made a few changes, but please be assured of my courteous intent!)