If you define a bureaucracy making best practices so broadly as to capture GitHub issues, then the term becomes meaningless. The sense the OP is trying to argu

If you define a bureaucracy making best practices so broadly as to capture GitHub issues, then the term becomes meaningless. The sense the OP is trying to argue for (rather unsuccessfully) is a government bureaucracy that forbids people from deviating from those best practices. This is "serious", you see, whereas a competitive market of ideas leading to the organic development of best practices (what we have now) is "trivial". The problem with that idea is that although it pleases people who associate government control with seriousness, the evidence it actually leads to better outcomes is mixed at best, and negative at worst. Regulatory capture is a real problem in many industries, and the attempt to fix things with regulated "best practices" can often be short term hacks that also inconveniently render more robust long term fixes illegal (finance has a lot of problems like this). In the software world you can look at things like MISRA-C or FIPS to get a taste of what everything would look like if we don't keep systematically pushing back against these misguided people.