> If a ruling class or inner circle has already decided on a course of action, you rarely change anything with good discourse practices. Quite true. Especially

> If a ruling class or inner circle has already decided on a course of action, you rarely change anything with good discourse practices. Quite true. Especially in the worksplace where RFC/design meetings are only done to validate what has already been decided. > CoCs are always protecting the inner circle and their opinions CoC are 99% not doing that. Of course people can abuse it but I don't see it in practice most of the time. It's just that the abuse/drama gets more attention. > In the early days of open source, flame wars were considered a legitimate way for voicing opinions Flame wars have always been discouraged. As soon as one starts, mods usually step in and shut it down. > Now, in corporate controlled "open" source, the dominance hierarchy must be protected. Yes, very few corporate-backed open source projects are truly open to collaboration, especially when it changes the feature set. If you want to submit bug reports, help users or a PR for a tiny bug, that's all good. In their defense, the employees of those companies do the most work so they get to decide. But they do benefit enormously from having the code open (something they very often forget).