Ultimately, the person who originally created the project had a good idea and has a claim to the products [it is _their_ "original fork" anyhow, and anyone else

Ultimately, the person who originally created the project had a good idea and has a claim to the products [it is _their_ "original fork" anyhow, and anyone else can fork the project if they want.]. It is difficult for _any_ open source or self organizing group to come up with good leadership. The default is the originators and those who they think are contributing. That is what forking is for, if something calcifies, re-vitalize it with a new repository and your own control. Open source gives you control over things, either as a creator, or for your own purposes as a fork. You can fork it and put it under a CoC if you want, then see who contributes where. That's what the _free_ part of open source refers to. It is difficult for _any_ group to not calcify into a leadership position, but I'd rather have the calcified remnants of those who produced something at some time, instead of having an arbitrary committee based on modern liberal ideals and pushed by an external group.