3 ms·
That is because he is a real person using his real name. He might have believed in this nonsense and is only now seeing CoCs for what they really are. He might
by obviouslynotme 6y ago
That is because he is a real person using his real name. He might have believed in this nonsense and is only now seeing CoCs for what they really are. He might not be comfortable publicly rebelling against the new orthodoxy. These tribunals are no joke.
- svrb 6y agoOr we can take the author at his word and understand that he is part of the problem. He's still in favor of CoCs after all this, and the only example we have of a CoC he isn't in favor of is one which got applied to him... in the same way CoCs are always applied.
- sgift 6y agoOr we can take what the author writes the way he writes it: CoCs are not bad, not following your own process for enforcement of CoC (which also has problems in this specific case) is bad. The answer to "this type of enforcement is bad" is not "no enforcement".