[Preamble]
> Some FOSS project leaders have taken a zero-tolerance approach to any LLM-gen-AI contributions to their projects. We support leaders who make such decisions. FOSS project leaders deserve our sympathy and understanding regarding the volumous onslaught of new contributions.

What irks me most is that this is the first, the primary, and the only argument the preamble lists for maintainers rejecting LLM-gen-AI contributions. Is that really the case? Yeah, the increased workload is menacing, but I have never seen any maintainer close down their project due to a manually made "volumous onslaught of new contributions". Most maintainers even strive once their project takes off and they get many contributions, even if it means they cannot personally keep pace.

Isn't it rather due to the low quality of contributions? The lack of human interaction? The questionable sourcing of LLMs? The dehumanizing conditions behind manual LLM training? The gatekeeping of LLM companies? The exorbitant energy requirements? You name it.

The preamble reads like maintainers mainly struggle due to the alleged increased productivity of the software world. I reject that premise. And it puts the otherwise laudable effort of that list into a bad light.