I'm referring to your use of the dress code. Unlike the clearly written "No shoes, No Shirt - No Service" sign, the "sign" in this case is the relative offensiveness of ones behaviour.
You just have to be offensive to "any single person" to trigger the "no service" condition.
It's a matter of degree, isn't it? At some point there's clearly a threshold of unacceptable behavior right?
The trick is to have that threshold be at a "reasonable" level. That's tricky and has room for error, but it doesn't mean it's not worth doing.
Note that my original response was to this statement: "As I see it, a CoC is a tool for those in power to better exert their influence and control."
We need guidelines for group activities, and they need to evolve as we learn more about the world, and framing this as a tool for power tripping is "the elites".
From the article, it appears that the "rules" were not well communicated and/or were poorly enforced. Blaming it on having a CoC vs. a person making poor choices is what I'm pushing back against.
You just have to be offensive to "any single person" to trigger the "no service" condition.