> do you really think ... is a good takeaway from ... Sure, I've seen that sort of response many times from technical communities with newbies who demand too m

> do you really think ... is a good takeaway from ... Sure, I've seen that sort of response many times from technical communities with newbies who demand too much of someone's time. It's the only specific example in that entire section, and the author continues throughout the post to point out how valuable they believe contributors' time is. It seems to me like one of the core issues motivating this post is a mismatch in expectations about how valuable that time is, thus my conclusion The rest of the post isn't really substantial otherwise. The code of conduct section has no tangible or even hinted examples of selective enforcement, just the author stating they know any reports are going to Andrew, and that they don't trust Andrew to actually be fair. The section about inclusion of women is actually about a single provocative thread getting locked (new member doesn't see the "swells of women" they expected to see in the forum roster, assumes all the members are guys who are "bro-ing it up", then tells them to police themselves), with the author somehow concluding that as a sign women aren't welcome in the community. I'm not sure how the name re-registration policy is evidence of a toxic culture, but even if it was on-topic the author doesn't really seem too understanding of the problem it's intended to solve, and that the ethics policy they link indicates that the intent is for legitimate cases of theft to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The hostility to forking section seemed fishy, but by the time I got to that section honestly I felt like it was another case of the author crying wolf and didn't bother looking for the details the author should have included.