I'd just reject it for being ridiculous. It didn't pass the first step of the review process: the sniff test.

Charitably, even though it is not what you or I would do, the pull request could be a best good faith effort of a real human being.

So to me, it's less about being ridiculous (and "ridiculous" is a fighting word) and more a simple "that's not how this team does things because we don't have the resources to work that way."

Mildly hurt feelings in the most likely worst case (no food for a viral overtop tweet). At best recruitment of someone with cultural fit.

▲

JohnFen 5 days ago | parent [-]

My objection to a PR like this has nothing to do with whether or not a human wrote it. It's that the PR is too large and complex. The reason I'd give for rejecting it would be that. I wouldn't say "it's ridiculous" as the reason. I would 100% be thinking that, though.

	▲	brudgers 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		That’s good. My experience is “too large/complex” provides an opening for arguementivenes and/or drama. “We don’t do it like this” does not so much. It is social, sufficient and not a matter of opinion (“too” is a matter of opinion).