On 10 Apr 2014 19:55, "Tobias Ellinghaus" <<a href="mailto:houz@gmx.de">houz@gmx.de</a>> wrote: > > two equal opponents That abstract concept is a fallacy. It's a mirage. It never occurs in reality. Power is always at play and has many forms. No opponents are equal, each of us has our strengths and weaknesses. Susan's email describes things she thinks should happen when people in our community see each other as opponents for a moment. This perspective is part of human nature and regularly occurs, despite our aspirations for peace and seeing the people around us as brothers and sisters. Therefore we need a structure for dealing with power, lest we suffer the tyranny of structurelessness where power is exercised unbound. I don't know what to do about what Susan described, nor am I much interested in further details. I didn't hear anything about this until Susan's email, and I don't care to: No further elaboration is necessary because that's the point, that without a CoC we will have no standard to judge how much should be done in public. If you don't have the power to know what happened but you want to, maybe you'll propose a CoC name accusers and accused. Maybe that's a good idea, maybe it's not. Susan deliberately worded email to not do it. Fine by me. The point is not this instance, the point is without a CoC, an endless variety of these incidents, resolved each in a circumstantial ad hoc way, and each instance forgotten only for its structure to be repeated. The silver lining then is that the CoC now has a test case which we can use to answer 'what should happen' in concrete detail, and which Susan has started enumerating for us. To the future.