using an official project e-mail address, posting via an official social media account

Do we have those?

If you are unsure whether an incident is a violation, or whether the space where the incident took place is covered by our Code of Conduct, we encourage you to still report it.

Does that include events before acceptance of that code?

using an official project e-mail address, posting via an official social media account

Do we have those?

I suppose adelikat's email would be the closest to an official project e-mail address, but overall not really. We don't have any official social media accounts either. Although I suppose these are more examples and are things that could in theory become reality.

If you are unsure whether an incident is a violation, or whether the space where the incident took place is covered by our Code of Conduct, we encourage you to still report it.

Does that include events before acceptance of that code?

I wouldn't be so sure, which I would hope discussion on this PR would have that be decided. Personally, I would think it would be best to have it somewhat "grandfathered" or so any events beforehand should be given more as a warning / thinner ice for those people.

Hahaha I appreciate your courtesy in including me in the list of potential vetoes. Count me as an actual veto.

For the record, I agree with the assessment of #3172 and think behavior needs to be addressed. I also think a code of conduct is a good idea, if everyone would be willing to agree with this and treat it seriously.

An important issue though is that my email that's mention no longer exists and likely won't ever exist (I'll have to figure something out for the tasvideos repo, but that's not a relevant problem here)

Regarding personal approval/agreement to the code, I don't like to speak in copypaste but I'm ready to follow the suggested thing.

snipped edit: pinged adelikat on Discord instead

To explain my downvote: I believe such community interaction policies aren't useful unless the project has 100 devs and an HR team. Also, the proposal as it stands implies the existence of a governance structure that we just don't have (yet)—decisions are made by informal consensus and infra/secrets/"hiring" are managed by whoever is available and willing.

These kinds of policies would mostly just apply to regular developers, who currently are ones who have pushed to the repo "recently" (perhaps this access should be more restricted?). Optimally the governance structure would ultimately be the org "owners" (adelikat / zeromus / feos), but given zeromus' reply I suppose that wouldn't work out :(

Run through some scenarios of how this would play out in your head. It's almost comical. The lords of the place aren't administering justice, so the contributors tweet about it, crash the palace, run them out of town on a rail, and take up administrative duties?