You may dislike the outcome, but it was not ignored.
I can accept that I don't like the outcome, but I can point to maybe a dozen people in the last
exchange worried about the CoC being used to further political goals, and the only response
was "well, the CoC Committee will handle it reasonable" which is not a good answer, because
that's exactly the situation that we are worried about not happening! These concerns were never
actually addressed and always just brushed aside -- that's what I found bothersome and worrisome.
We shouldn't have to expect the rules to be applied fairly in order to counter actual abuses of the
rules. I've seen it in other groups and have been the target of such actions. (I had the gall to claim
that hiring practices that require submitting side- or open-source- work aren't only detrimental to
women because they statistically shoulder more of the housework and childcare, but also to
husbands and fathers who take an active role in the household and childcare. It wasn't intended to
diminish the effect this hiring practice has on women, but to suggest that it's a broader problem than
the conversation at that point was making it out to be. I was subsequently silenced and eventually
booted from the group for that incident and another, in a social channel, where a discussion on guns
was taking place and someone said that the discussion is sexist and this is why there are so few
female programmers, and I had the impertinence to say that I know more women who hunt and shot
for sport then men (it's ~50-50 in this area). Forgive me for not having a favourable view of CoCs.)
So, it's not that I don't trust the CoC Committee, but I just really don't trust most people. The clearer
the rules the better. As it stands, the rules are extremely vague and overreaching.
Jim
