Re: Who are these people
>something a bit more serious that "be excellent to each other" seems like a good idea.
Actually, no it isn't. It is far more inclusive and all-encompassing than the limited categories in the CoC.
The problem with the CoC is not so much with the words but with the spirit. It betrays an obsession with feelz and a demand for ideological purity which many people find revolting. You don't need a CoC to deal with what is illegal. The CoC is a indicative of a desire to turn things which are not the law, into effective law. If you can be kicked out because you called someone "fat" despite making valuable code contributions, it indicates that that code contributions are valued less than all those listed things in the CoC: age, body size, disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
So you can't say, "oh, typical Yank!" or you can be thrown out.
There's a lot of typical SJW stuff in there. It's mostly obsessed with sex, race and gender. Since this won't be showing up in code, it betrays a desire to control people outside of the code contributions. To punish people for wrong-think and the expression of bad thoughts. Can you express thoughts regarding illegal immigration without falling foul of this?
Again, it isn't the really the contents that are the problem, everyone should be complying with this. The problem is its enforcement and the threat of exclusion for non-compliance. There is a reason we don't put this stuff into law - it is impossible to objectively and sensibly enforce it. Where it is put into law, it leads to ridiculous oppression and partisan behaviour.