Code of Conduct

As there are concerns about the CoC in it's current state, I'd be happier to hold tight before going live with something that's a little more ironed out

I haven't been keeping track of the development of the CoC and I'm unfamiliar with CoC in general, but I see some dissent in the other votes so I'm reluctant to let this draft go through without having read an explanation of its pros/cons/criticisms

As described; I would vote yes if we can't get a new CoC lead to develop a better CoC short-term. But if we can get someone to lead a short-term effort to make or adopt a better CoC, I'll vote no.

Uncertain. Much like @cathalgarvey, I think we should attempt to deal with @meltheadorable et al.'s points, if we can. If we can't do it because we don't have the time or the contributions, what we have is probably better than nothing.

I made a few tiny edits but agree to the proposal whether or not they are included in the final draft. This is an excellent and well-written policy.

I made a few tiny edits but agree to the proposal whether or not they are included in the final draft. This is an excellent and well-written policy.

I made a few tiny edits but agree to the proposal whether or not they are included in the final draft. This is an excellent and clearly-written policy. I respect and appreciate Melody's concerns about process. We need to start somewhere, though.

EDIT: previously disagreed, but having read more and pondered I reckon it's useful to have SOMETHING short-term even if it's not optimal. It doesn't positively dangerous, so it could serve as a stop-gap until further refinements are made.

Given the concerns raised by others (e.g. @christinahendricks and @meltheadorable) I think it would be good to go back to the drawing board.