> Users posting unreviewed LLM-generated content without any admission will be immediately be banned without recourse.
Yikes. If maintainers want to ban people for wasting their time, that's great, but considering how paranoid people have gotten about whether something is from an LLM or not, this seems heavy-handed. There needs to be some kind of recourse. How many legitimate-but-simply-wrong contributors will be banned due to policies like this?
That discussion doesn’t track the change: the discussion is around unreviewed content and is quite nuanced, but the change actually is far stricter, extending to any use of an LLM, reviewed or not.
As it stands, a potential contributor couldn’t even use basic tab completion for even a single line of code. That’s… certainly a choice, and one that makes me less confident in the project’s ability to retain reliable human contributors than would otherwise be the case.
I might be misunderstanding you, but that discussion tracks the implementation of the initial policy and its recent revision. The most recent post is from the maintainer and certainly seems to match the change:
> I will update chezmoi's contribution guide for LLM-generated content to say simply "no LLM-generated content is allowed and if you submit anything that looks even slightly LLM-generated then you will be immediately be banned."
I don't understand why this needs to be repeated ad infinitum. Professionals can smell AI by distinct lack of merit. And so they're getting banned across industries. Pro-AI people can't, sure, and that doesn't mean anything.
They'll be taking the AI contributions if AI contributions were useful. The fundamental problem is that AI output is still mostly just garbage.