Is there an official commentary/explanation of the CC's copy?

[dradetsky]

Recently I submitted a minor fix to the abuse contacts in the CoC of a project. Ancillary to this, one of the maintainers took it upon himself to slightly rewrite the copy of the "Enforcement section." I advised him not to remove the phrase "responsible for enforcement" from the passage

Instances of abusive, harassing, or otherwise unacceptable behavior may be reported to the community leaders responsible for enforcement at

since I believed that this phrase must have been included intentionally/advisedly¹ (and thus he should only remove it if he was really confident he understood the rationale for including it in the first place, and what he was trying to accomplish by removing it).

However, I cannot actually be sure that I am correct about this point (even though I'm reasonably confident), so I figured I ought to check whether the EthicalSource peeps had addressed this point or not. Or for that matter other points. For example (and I must emphasize that I am REALLY NOT TRYING TO START A DEBATE IN THE ISSUES PLS NO HALP), why do we say

The use of sexualized language or imagery, and sexual attention or advances of any kind

as opposed to

The use of sexualized language or imagery, and UNWANTED sexual attention or advances of any kind

And other similar questions. I must stress again that I AM NOT ASKING FOR INDIVIDUAL COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO GIVE ME THEIR PERSONAL OPINIONS ABOUT THESE POINTS (such a discussion has an extremely high risk of becoming unproductive). I am wondering whether:

• The project leaders have written any sort of official commentary on the rationale behind the copy choices in the CC.
• There are any similar commentaries not written by the project leaders, but which the project & its leaders officially endorse.

Additionally, I'm currently writing up a slightly modified version of the CC which might be a better fit for some projects (though there is a high chance I won't ever actually publish it). In doing so, I'm keen to avoid repeating mistakes anyone else has already made and learned from (I prefer bespoke, artisanal mistakes), so if anything kinds of official or quasi-official commentaries/explanations/lessons-learned/etc have been written already, I would like to know about them and would also suggest they be linked from the project.

Footnotes

1. I assumed it had been written that way in order to A) let submitters know that someone was responsible for enforcement and that they could expect enforcement and B) make it clear to community leaders that they were in fact responsible for enforcement, as opposed to just getting a fancy hat to wear to at community events or whatever. ↩