Most of these, maybe all, have a dual pull request antipattern. > The Ransom Note A developer submits a patch that's especially important to them. When you po

Most of these, maybe all, have a dual pull request antipattern. > The Ransom Note A developer submits a patch that's especially important to them. When you point out that additional changes are needed elsewhere to make the component stay logically consistent, you get told that those changes are unrelated to the problem being solved (their problem being solved). > The Guessing Game A developer submits a substantial patch. They contents of the patch indicates that the submitter has not understood the design of the code they're modifying. When the reviewer communicating this back to the submitter, the submitter expects the reviewer to drop what they're working on and instead work on designing the feature the submitter needs. > The Priority Inversion A large patch has been submitted with poor explanation of the underlying design. Properly reviewing if the patch makes sense takes time. The submitter (publicly) complains that they (verifyably) aren't getting responses to their code reviews and that this is holding back feature X. > The Catch-22 There's a tradeoff to be made, and the decision made by the submitter is far off the mark. --- The problem usually isn't picky reviewers or sloppy submitters, it's the lack of clear contribution guidelines.