What is your objection? Do we have a disagreement about licensing, for instance because you'd advocate a copyleft license instead? Or do you disagree with the notion that open source contributors should have the option of opting out of social coding?

Certainly I would expect amyjess and anyone else reading to exercise due skepticism and perform their own research and I respect them enough to expect that they will "consider" my suggestion rather than "blindly" follow it.

I think people shouldn't ill-informedly attempt to waive their legal rights, especially not in ways that are legally murky, and I think people shouldn't ill-informedly encourage others to waive legal rights in murky ways they may not be aware of. You didn't even mention "public domain" once and implied "CC0" was a form of license, despite attempting a public domain dedication being a very different thing from licensing copyrighted works.

Well, for jurisdictions where dedication to the public domain is not possible, CC0 includes a fallback license. I suppose I could have used the words "public domain", and that would have made the intention clearer — so thank you for raising that point. However, if you are going to do a public domain dedication, you really should use CC0!

PS: Why assume everyone is "ill-informed"? We're all learning together forever: you, me, amyjess, other readers...