That surprises me -- from what I've seen, Daniel is actually remarkably tolerant of incomplete/unclear reports. (Too tolerant.) But I imagine that could depend on the day.

(Now, if you used AI to generate the report, well... that's different. Especially if you didn't disclose it up front.)

On the flip side I’ve been following him for a while on Mastodon.

I’ve basically watched the AI crap cycle go from “this is a weird report, oh it’s fake” to “all the reports are trash, it’s so hard to find real humans in the flood” through his posts.

I suspect I would’ve stepped down long ago. I feel so bad for the open source maintainers who are just being assaulted with nonsense.