3 ms·

>whether public universities can enforce codes of conduct which may compel speech. Where would such a precedent leave things in terms of codes of conduct and o

• wredue 3y ago
  Or trespassing people who are no longer welcome. The idea that code of conduct can’t exist is nonsense. The idea that it violates free speech is also nonsense, as it has been well settled that you don’t have free speech on private land.
  • wmidwestranger 3y ago
    I can imagine codes of conduct are helping somebody and I wouldn't want to spoil their good times but I'm still a little salty that sqlite was forced to change their terms, based loosely on the Benedictine Order Code, so they could have corporate sponsors. My intuition suggests a large and random set of assholes has been replaced by a specific and goal-oriented set of assholes. I'll admit, the internet is everywhere, so every asshole is on the internet. I just remember before the Code of Conduct, there was definitely one less potential layer of assholes above, despite an ever present layer of assholes below, and there seemed to be more crazy and less conformist people. Would write more but I need to go yell at a cloud.
    • wredue 3y ago
      The thing is that most people never ever have to deal with codes of conduct because, as it turns out, treating other with respect, really isn’t a difficult thing to do.
• russell_h 3y ago
  It would have no effect at all. Public universities are part of the (state) government, so are bound by the first amendment. Open source projects are not part of the government, so their freedom to associate with whoever they choose (with some limitations implied by eg the 14th amendment, but nothing likely to affect currently prominent codes of conduct) is protected by the 1st amendment.
• mrandish 3y ago
  As I said above, I am totally not an expert on any of this, so you should seek real answers from authoritative sources. However, I think I can safely clarify at least this much... In this context, "Public University" means an institution substantially run by or funded by the U.S. government. Only some universities are public and many others are private. And different rules apply because the government is held to constitutional standards. Conversely, "Public Domain" relates to the copyright status of a creative work and is entirely unrelated to how something is funded. Legally, a "Code of Conduct" is basically just a contract. In the U.S. the "Freedom of Contract" and "Freedom of Association" between consenting adults are, thankfully, pretty damn expansive. If you want to create a non-government owned, run or funded project, club, cabal or coven which involves a contractual obligation requiring Taylor Swift tattoos and apple cider enemas, I'm pretty sure consenting adults can voluntarily agree to that if they chose to (although it should be noted, enforcement of such a contract will likely be limited to rejecting or expelling non-complying members).
  • wmidwestranger 3y ago
    Don't know why you're being downvoted, the issue isn't the contractual obligation but the method of enforcement. If I sign a contract saying I'll take an apple cider enema and I don't, that doesn't automatically mean I've given permission to have one administered! That might mean I get kicked out of the contract but it doesn't mean that I can be forced to abide by the contract.
    • mrandish 3y ago
      Yeah, my humorous (but still technically valid!) example was probably ill-advised in this forum. Separately, although I am not a lawyer, I have decades of business experience which often involved working closely with lawyers and my circle of friends happens to include several attorneys, prosecutors and judges, so I'd say I have an unusually broad understanding of legal matters for a non-lawyer (especially contract, IP and business law). I also just find legal stuff interesting to learn about and I'm one of those oddballs who looks forward to June because I find well-written SCOTUS rulings (and dissents!) fun to read. Yet, I'm still surprised at the lack of even high-school civics-level knowledge of basic legal principles I come across in otherwise intelligent, well-educated professionals including doctors, MBAs, engineers, etc. It's kind of sad because the latent engineer in me finds the system architecture of the U.S. legal framework to be fascinating. Yes, it's imperfect in many ways, yet it's still a brilliant, iterative, collection of attempts to solve a 'wicked' bundle of thorny problems through successive approximation. Despite its flaws it still ends up eventually getting things pretty close to as "right" as they probably can be with remarkable frequency.