The Ctruth Code of Conduct

These are some general rules which I try to follow when having discussions with other people. I’ve been putting them together over the past few years based on my interactions with others. If you have any other ideas on how to add to this Code of Conduct, please comment below or send me an email.


1 – No bullying. This includes name-calling, ridiculing, belittling, mocking, and abusing.

2 – Make as few assumptions as possible about whoever you’re communicating with.

3 – Keep statements as truthful as possible.

4 – Keep your information relevant.



1 – Try not to load it with false assumptions/assertions.
An example of loading a question with false information is: if you were to ask someone who doesn’t hate the color blue “why do you hate the color blue?”.


1 – If someone asks you a question that can be answered with a yes or no, answer it with a yes or no. If it can be answered with a yes or no but you don’t know the right answer, say “I don’t know”.

2 – Include part of the question in the answer. This can help keep your answer relevant.

Grice’s Maxims

Grice’s Maxims of Conversation are aimed at helping with effective communication. While they have received some criticisms, I think they are useful for critical thinkers who want to share information effectively. I include them here for you to decide whether or not you want to use them.

1 – The Maxim of Quantity: don’t say too much or too little. Say only that which is necessary.

2 – The Maxim of Quality: don’t say things that you know are false or things that you can’t back up with evidence. Be as honest as possible.

3 – The Maxim of Relation: don’t say things which are irrelevant. Only include relevant information.

4 – The Maxim of Manner: don’t be ambiguous. Keep your speech clear and easy to understand.

4 Comments on “The Ctruth Code of Conduct

  1. I don’t agree with Rule Three, or at any rate making it explicit. How do you ‘keep statements as truthful as possible’? “Nah, I think I’ll tell lies for a bit, wtf.” Which leads on to Grice’s urging us to stick to “things you can back up with evidence”. In my experience ‘evidence’ is a slippery slope. Applying common sense to the evidence is more often the thing to do.


      • Well, academics tend to treat evidence as gospel and, since lay people are not normally able or willing to deal with the evidence direct, you ask yourself ‘does this make sense?’ If it doesn’t and you give voice to your doubt you will be told firmly, “I’m sorry, but it’s in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle” or, even worse and even more common, “I’m sorry, but all the experts who have examined it say it is ninth century.” They don’t seem to understand that ‘evidence’ is a start not a finishing point.

        As for trying my best to be truthful, I still don’t know what it means. Human beings only have two modes, telling the truth and not telling the truth. I always do my best in either mode. I can do no other. And nor can anybody else.


      • your response is similar to the ones that inspired me to add in the bit about including part of the question in your response

        “Common sense is…” and then you give your definition


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: