Code of conduct

Version 0.1 · Status: EXPERIMENTAL

This registry exists to coordinate people who disagree. Disagreement is protected here. What follows governs how it is conducted, not whether it is permitted.

1. The seven rules

1. Critique claims, not people. "This edge has no evidence behind it" is the system working as designed. Speculation about someone's motives, competence or character is not.

2. Bring evidence. An objection carries a source or a line of reasoning. "I don't like it" is voice — everyone has it, always — but it is not an objection the record has to answer.

3. Disclose rather than hide. Conflicts of interest are normal. Disclosed ones are data. Undisclosed ones, once exposed, are a conduct issue. The project does not hunt for purity; it asks you to say what you are.

4. Correction is honoured. Correcting your own earlier claim earns standing (VOTING.md §8). Punishing somebody for doing it is itself a violation.

5. No harassment. No personal attacks, doxxing, intimidation or sustained unwanted contact — in any channel, canonical or not (COMMUNICATIONS.md).

6. No impersonation. Of people, of projects, or of roles.

7. Use the process in good faith. Disputes, objections and emergency reports are tools. Demonstrably vexatious use of them is a conduct issue.

2. Reporting

Reports go to the private plane (COMMUNICATIONS.md §6) — one of the few things private channels are legitimately for.

3. Who enforces

Outcomes are recorded in the governance ledger, redacted where a person's safety requires it.

Redacted is not the same as absent. A conduct action that left no trace at all would be exactly the invisible governance this project refuses (COMMUNICATIONS.md §7).

See also: CONTRIBUTING.md — how to take part · VOTING.md — what earns a say · SECURITY.md — for vulnerabilities rather than conduct