> I recognize that there are some who think that way. It makes me sad. But that attitude as phrased is entirely backwards. If a conduct related enforcement acti

> I recognize that there are some who think that way. It makes me sad. But that attitude as phrased is entirely backwards. If a conduct related enforcement action happens and that “ruins their career”, the responsibility for that lies entirely on them. It was their behavior that got them there in the first place. That seems obviously incorrect. The outcome is a combination of their behavior, the text of the CoC, and the subjective interpretation of the CoC and the behavior (by the people doing the enforcement). Any of these could be "wrong". I gather that the person making this comment was one of the people doing the enforcement. Obviously they'd think that in any specific case, the CoC was reasonable and their reading of it and their interpretation of the behavior was correct. If they didn't think that, they would have reached a different outcome. But this isn't a statement about a specific case. It's a statement about generalities. And it's pretty disturbing that the people running the show refuse to acknowledge the possibility of errors even on a theoretical level.