Re: Code of Conduct plan

> Your example is flawed because:
>
> Multi-Partner has nothing to do with sexuality unless you want to make the
> argument that your belief is that a relationship should be between one
> person and another and in this argument a man and a woman which has
> literally nothing to do with the word multi or partner in a technical
> context.
>
>
Gay couples often call their significant other their partner. It's not
uncommon, at least where I'm from. Partner can be a very politically
charged word because of this, especially outside of a strictly business
sense, e.g. LLP. Partner doesn't really have a "technical" meaning.

Does your insistence that my RPC isn't correct an attack on my RPC?

>
> In short the fundamental outcome is that the community wouldn't let it get
> that far. We have 20 years of results to show in that one.
>

So, you're saying we don't need a CoC because in 20 years you've never had
an issue? That doesn't seem like a good response.