"Better" in the sense that it doesn't risk the problems the other does. My intention with that example was to make it clear I don't have a problem with people doing whatever, regardless of me liking it or not.
I think they're saying CoCs are being weaponized to enable arbitrary enforcement/discipline using subjective terminology (which I have noticed as well), and that that's a bad thing.
I have also noticed a stark hypocrisy where the moderators do exactly what their own rules say not to do, and they get away with it, but their users don't.
It's like they're just using the CoC to suppress opinions they don't like.
if a CoC can be weaponized, then the CoC is badly written. the existence of a CoC by itself is not the issue, even though some people claim that it is. that is a problem in itself.
"Better" in the sense that it doesn't risk the problems the other does. My intention with that example was to make it clear I don't have a problem with people doing whatever, regardless of me liking it or not.
I think they're saying CoCs are being weaponized to enable arbitrary enforcement/discipline using subjective terminology (which I have noticed as well), and that that's a bad thing.
I have also noticed a stark hypocrisy where the moderators do exactly what their own rules say not to do, and they get away with it, but their users don't.
It's like they're just using the CoC to suppress opinions they don't like.
if a CoC can be weaponized, then the CoC is badly written. the existence of a CoC by itself is not the issue, even though some people claim that it is. that is a problem in itself.