3 ms·

> Rather, Codes of Conduct are more difficult than you think. That's a bug when trying to apply a coherent standard, but it's a feature when using the document

• gwd 6y ago
  > That's a bug when trying to apply a coherent standard, but it's a feature when using the document as cover for arbitrary mob action. I hate to break it to you, but bad actors will use any available tool they can to gain power and do harm. If there's no Code of Conduct, some bad actor will take advantage of the ambiguity to do things they know make other people uncomfortable, just because they can. If there's an overly broad Code of Conduct, or one which doesn't protect the rights of the "accused" (either in how it's written or how it's enforced), then other bad actors will take advantage of it to exert power. That's why laws have to be written "defensively", like code exposed to the open internet. You have to try to anticipate exploits by bad actors ahead of time; and fix the ones you didn't spot as they're exploited.
  • Footkerchief 6y ago
    > bad actors will use any available tool they can to gain power and do harm Of course they will. That's what makes them bad actors :) But are the bad actors in the two scenarios (with/without Coc) the same kind of bad actors? Do they have the same set of motivations for being in the community, and the same ability to rally supporters? My perception is that the bad actors in the two scenarios are wildly different, and that they're different because Codes of Conduct tend to distort the core incentives for participation in the community.