Version reviewed: https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/cepc-20200716/

Section 3.2.1 discusses "Safety versus Comfort". I agree with prioritizing the safety of marginalized individuals over the comfort of others, but in reading the section, it is not clear to me what guidance is intended. It includes these examples:

"Reverse" -isms, including "reverse racism," "reverse sexism," and "cisphobia".

I personally find the term "reverse racism" offensive (both because it denies the historic impact of "forward racism", and because it implies that historic racism is "forward"), so that may interfere with my ability to understand the point of this example. But it feels like it lacks a verb. Is it trying to say that "reverse racism" is unacceptable? Or that the negative impact of (historically "forward"?) racism" takes precedence over "reverse racism"? If so, I think it would help to state that explicitly.

Reasonable communication of boundaries, such as “leave me alone,” “go away,” or “I’m not discussing this with you”.

I personally would be rather shocked if I tried to ask someone a technical question and the person responded "Go away" or "I'm not discussing this with you". I would NOT consider that a "reasonable communication of boundaries" in any sense. I would consider that quite anti-social behavior that is NOT conducive to building an inclusive and welcoming work environment. So I don't know exactly what guidance is intended by this example, but whatever it is, I think should be clarified.

Communication in a tone you don’t find congenial.

Again, I think a non-congenial tone is not conducive to building an welcoming work environment, and over time, can even constitute harassment (micro aggressions). So again, it isn't clear to me what guidance is intended.

Criticisms of racist, sexist, cissexist, or otherwise oppressive behavior or assumptions."

To my mind, racism, sexism and oppressive behaviors should not be tolerated. But again it isn't clear to me what guidance this example intends to be giving. Is it trying to say that speaking out against racism, sexism and oppressive behaviors might make some people uncomfortable, but that discomfort is less important than speaking out against such harms? If so, I think it would be helpful to say so explicitly. If not, please tell me what guidance is intended by that example, because I find it unclear.

P.S. Thank you again to everyone who has put so much effort into drafting this document!