> If a code of conducts contains stuff you are within the bounds of anyways, why would you care it is there?

If it would contain stuff you're within bounds of anyways, then it's entirely unneeded. :)

Yes sure, but what I mean here is stuff, that can start interpersonal conflicts. To stay with the band example, different people will have different sensibilties around their equipment and how to respectfully treat it. If everybody does it their way you basically guarantee some sort of clash. The solution is to make a general rule that may seem overly sensitive to that one punk member that throws their gear on a pile, but everybody else is happy and the conflicts are avoided.

What I want to say here, is that a good code of conduct deals with the stuff that is open to interpretation and defines it. So if our punk-bandmate throws the singers gear on a pile we don't have to argue about different definitions of how we expect others gear to be treated.

So it is needed precisely because everybody thinks they are just acting normal and within bounds, even when the majority thinks they are not.

>If a code of conducts contains stuff you are within the bounds of anyways, why would you care it is there?

Maybe he don't want to exclude people who are outside of the CoC norms, but can still be valuable contributors.