IMO this is sane and well worded, I am bookmarking this as wording more projects should at least consider.

But I think they need to expand on the response to vibe codes PRs and such. Getting flooded with this is extremely damaging to a project, so I think their response should be quite strong; immediately close vibe coded PRs, walls of slop, and such, and have a low bar for banning the submitters/spammers behind them.

It’s kind of like spam on the Fediverse. Best to take an extremely aggressive approach as a “deterrent” lest spammers collectively decide its fertile ground.

The result will be poor-quality work that eventually becomes someone else’s problem.

I am sure they mean ‘the result of being lazy’, not ‘the result of following the golden rule for LLM usage’, but I think they could have expressed this more clearly.

There are two sides to very coin. I would prefer a positive statement about the benefits of doing the right things, rather than the harm of doing the wrong things. One can argue that they are equivalent and one can be derived or deduced from the other, but I think they produce different moods and attitudes to our fellows, despite the technical equivalence.

I don’t agree that no one should know if a contributor uses LLMs. I think there are associated risks to using LLMs and knowing they were used helps others to mitigate those risks.