Random example, if you want one likely to apply to an issue tracker: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers-b... Reporting a bug about fixing such an assumption will almost certainly involve some discussion about identity. And if you tell people to shut up because their concerns aren't technical, the bug won't get fixed, and the next bug like it won't even get reported because you've made it clear that you don't care.
Another example: submitting a patch to change "master/slave" terminology into "primary/replica".
Another example: submitting a patch to avoid assuming male pronouns in documentation, in an effort to not make the default assumption that the reader is male.
> So is Linus' behavior hateful or not
When he's creatively explaining how a piece of code is broken, there's nothing wrong with that. When he's telling people that they should have been "retroactively aborted", yes, that's hateful. As mentioned, I've seen a lot less of that lately.
> Which one were those numbers pulled from?
Life isn't Wikipedia; direct primary research is perfectly acceptable.
What problem?
Why the double standard? Why is your CoC fine and dandy and mine is not? What of the people who don't want to waste time litigating sociology and who want to code? Why can they just "go away" as you say and people who want to muddy coding with other non-coding interests not?
My entire point was that there are plenty of communities that don't need this, and so far, you've not shown that the problem it sets out to solve actually exists outside of a few well-publicized outliers.
>I did. Contributions welcome; hateful behavior not.
So is Linus' behavior hateful or not, by your definition?
>There are myriad sources and firsthand accounts available if you look, and the numbers from that particular presentation are (to the best of my knowledge) based on a direct study.
Which study? There are many, many studies that detail the behavior in online communities (and given my recent courseload, I'm familiar with more of them than I'd like ^^). Which one were those numbers pulled from? Nobody knows, because the author didn't bother to include that data.. This is why cites are important.