Is there an example you have in mind where they were objectively wrong and did not admit it? In the examples I've seen their decisions generally seem reasonabl

Is there an example you have in mind where they were objectively wrong and did not admit it? In the examples I've seen their decisions generally seem reasonable and well-considered, even in cases where I disagreed with the outcome. The most I can say is that it might benefit some contributors to consider tone and messaging a little. With respect to closing tickets, unless someone is paying for the work I generally close feature requests that aren't compatible with a project's vision. Focusing is about saying "no" and building every feature every user requests eventually results in a bloated, unmaintainable project. Finally, with respect to downstream vendors and projects that incorporate pieces of the GNOME shell into their own software the GNOME team has made it pretty clear that (for better or worse) their focus is their own desktop environment. Asking contributors if they're willing to do additional work to support outside projects is reasonable, but demanding that they do so is not a good look.