I see the solution as only engaging with reasonable persons and ignore the rest.

And the problem is filtering them out. That is real work that can be draining and demoralizing as unreasonable persons usually have their sad story why they are the way they are, but you cannot do therapy or coaching for random strangers while trying to get a project going.

So if people contribute good things, engage with them. If they contribute slob (AI generated or not) - you say no to them.

▲

codebolt 9 hours ago | parent [-]

There must be a mechanism to rate the person submitting the PR. Anyone that wants to submit code to a well-known repo would first need to build a demonstrable history of making high-quality contributions to lesser known projects. I'm not very familiar with the open source scene but I'd find it very surprising if such a mechanism was not already in place. Seems like an obvious solution to the problem of vibe coders submitting slop.

▲

happymellon 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> build a demonstrable history of making high-quality contributions to lesser known projects.

> Seems like an obvious solution

I'm not sure how you would rank quality of submissions for grading contributors like this. Just because a project accepted your PR doesnt make it high quality, the best we can hope for is that it was better than no accepting it?

	▲	rwmj 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think we need one of those solution to spam checklists[1], but for AI slop. [1] https://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt

▲

lukan 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Oh it is a obvious solution, but not trivial to implement in a robust way.