Problem this is always going to have is that certain things are just too exhausting to list in their entirety. Say a rule against making people uncomfortable in the comments depends heavily on the individual, whether it be a user reading it or a moderator acting on a report. Unless such things are overly coerce and contain pretty specifically defined wording that only has one meaning you have the problem of justifying an action taken on behalf of such a rule.
A comment that strays too much into roleplay depends on the definition of "too much" or what one considers "light". Similarly jokes in bad taste are matters some comedians build their entire career on. In regards to comments, don't we already have a very clear indicator of the consensus of what's okay and what isn't in the form of the voting system? Or at a stretch if you receive 20 reports for the same comment?
I get the intention of most of these rules, though some may not. I think it might be helpful to clarify with either some examples of what to avoid or adding information about what the intent of a rule is and what it isn't suppose to make us not do. While that ends up being a rabbit-hole in itself, so does the current vagueness. I would argue it is better to have poor examples or complicated wording rather than a vague rule that could be laid out one too many ways. Nice short rules are easy to read and remember, but some people might struggle to grasp them.
