Mozilla's leadership has been bad for a while now, and while I currently use Forgejo for my personal stuff, what I saw of Forgejo's leadership in that issue makes me nervous about the parent organization as well.
Since they've deleted the criticism from the issue and removed it from the Internet Archive, I feel some level of obligation to get down my memory of that conversation before it fades, and here seems as good a place as any:
This person, crystal, applied to become an "enforcer" after previously having lost a lot of trust in the community. That bit you can still see, including the acknowledgement that this abuse of authority did occur. Someone posted saying basically that they still didn't trust crystal after whatever happened previously (they gave details of the story, but I don't remember them) and that they were opposed to their appointment to any position of authority, regardless of promises that they wouldn't do it again.
After a bit of back and forth, someone (I'm assuming Earl Warren) went in and edited all of this critic's comments with a note saying that the comments had been removed by the moderation team for "ad hominem attacks". That was disturbing to me at the time—the critic's criticisms were not non sequiturs, when someone is applying to be an "enforcer" their past abuse of authority is absolutely relevant!
And of course, now that I find that they have now memory-holed that discussion entirely I'm even more perturbed. That's not the behavior of an organization that deserves any of our trust, and I don't know how much of the bad behavior that I saw there applies to Codeberg as a whole.