Ha ha 'lobby microsoft'... keep dreaming.

People do. But users want the project on github, where they already have a login.

Also many people have no clue about managing remote repos from the commandline. They are actually using the github web interface to do merges and pulling that locally. So github also atrophies the necessary skills.

Yah... whereas the readership are all oil paintings...

The article seemed reasonably-written except this 74% / 78% thing... what is the margin of error they estimated for their method? That looks awfully similar to 'no difference'.

Well it's there as far as it got if people come to need it.

Which is more than you can say for the code that runs github.

I think this pernicious trend can't be dealt with by increasing the number of labels between you and the individuals doing it... it's basically hiding from it to start talking about SJW this, Marxist that in response to something an individual has done. Particularly if you maintain a FOSS project that only holds together by general consensus. The people around the maintainer are only there because they can get utility from the project, otherwise their outlook on everything else is unaligned with the maintainer. Strongly rejecting these claims without discussion (especially in the form of replying with derogatory labels), even though they are clearly divisive and made by people who don't use or contribute to the project, can weaken the maintainer's position since he's herding cats in the first place.

I guess it means explaining why their assumptions and claims do not apply, but that's an uphill battle if a mob piles on in a small project, that is maintained in someone's spare time. It's pretty nasty.