[gblake]

Originally Posted by Brian Michell

That does make sense. Thank you for your advice on that, we will definitely include that in our restructure. However, and I may be naive for saying so, people also assign meanings to words and ideals. We could all crack open a Websters dictionary and find the definition I think it would have much less of an impact on those who are not initiated in the culture of FIRST.

Well, now you are straying into a different kettle of fish, and you aren't naive; but... your result might lead people along a path different from the one the original author intended.

IMO it isn't necessary to be initiated into the FIRST culture to fully and immediately understand behaving both graciously and professionally. Along those lines, if participating in FIRST involves learning a (re)definition of GP that is different from what Jane Doe on the street would understand, then I think FIRST has let a problem creep into its program.

I believe that it is extremely valuable for GP to be clear and simple, with no special additions, subtractions, or meanings known (only) by a subset of those who might hear the term. In this regard, we aren't illuminati. Instead, what we know is ordinary.

However, in some circles, choosing to let those two words influence us more than Jane Doe might, can set us apart, and make us extraordinary.

Good luck with your Code of Conduct rewrite,
Blake