(creates throwaway account to avoid shitstorm) I run an event with a CoC. However I do see the other side of the argument: - the common CoCs from http://confc

(creates throwaway account to avoid shitstorm) I run an event with a CoC. However I do see the other side of the argument: - the common CoCs from http://confcodeofconduct.com/ http://confcodeofconduct.com/ are vague: they're defined by what is 'offensive' - choosing to be offended is very much a personal matter and it can be hard to guess what will offend others. 'Dongle' jokes? I've seen female speakers make a 40 min presentation on regular expressions filled with rude words, that, if they weren't female, would have caused a shitstorm. - CoCs being inconsistently enforced - a major hard-left conf organiser regularly retweets a well known online troll who constantly says things that violate their code of conduct, but since the trolls target a particular race and gender it's considered 'edgy' or 'ironic'. - The CoCs mix things people consider innate (gender, sexuality) with ideas (spirituality) and what many medical professional would consider lifestyles choices (obesity). These are not worthy of the same degrees of protection. I don't think fat people should feel bad, but I don't think saying someone is fat is the same thing as saying they'll go to hell because they're gay. - CoCs conflict with each other: spiritual views conflict with each other (I think God isn't real, someone else thinks that it is and disbelievers will go to hell, spiritual views conflict with sexuality (Christianity and gay marriage). Either party could feel offended. OK fine, lets not discuss religion or sexuality. Kind of feels sad to limit discussion.