So it sounds like active links between forks is intended to mirror the valid links between people/organizations that are doing business with one another. If pe

So it sounds like active links between forks is intended to mirror the valid links between people/organizations that are doing business with one another. If people or organizations end their relationship, then there's a way to cutoff any secondary contributors to the codebase to have the ability to make pull requests from -and- receive code updates. At first blush, I thought, "GitHub is mean and just locking-in their paying customers forever!!" But now after reading the comments here, I think this is a very pretty way to represent the nuances of a fork relationship. If the original owners of a private codebase disappear, then it is reasonable and just that all of the forks to their code should as well. I believe it's reasonable and just because GitHub have no way to interpret _why_ the original owner dropped off and must respect their ownership by breaking the relationship.