So what you seem to be suggesting is that the people who don't like a thing (codes of conduct) and go out of their way to try to weaponize them should be allowe

So what you seem to be suggesting is that the people who don't like a thing (codes of conduct) and go out of their way to try to weaponize them should be allowed to get their way (CoC should go away because of people like these). There's plenty of precedent for people advocating for this: spousal abuse, animal abuse and sexual abuse are all areas where people said that laws about such things would result in widespread abuse of the laws and would do little to correct the problems the laws aimed to address. We have that now with gun laws in the United States. People rather speciously say that new laws and the enforcement of those laws will be too intrusive, so we just really shouldn't have them. (I don't want to have a discussion about gun laws specifically - an overwhelming majority of the United States want strong gun laws, and those who are OK with multiple mass shootings every week really have no compelling arguments beyond vaguely invoking "the Second Amendment", but I imagine there's plenty of overlap between people who think CoC are bad would and people who don't want new gun laws. I use gun laws in this example because of the weakness of the anti-gun law arguments.) But what's really telling here are statements like this: "who claim to love open source but cannot stand the fact that anyone really is welcome" So the people who are breaking CoC and making people feel unwelcome are somehow more important than the people who are enforcing CoC and making the CoC breakers feel unwelcome. Got it.