Unless you're really into git and email, it's just tiresome and a time sink having to work all this out.
Fwiw I've used putty in the past and appreciate his efforts, if not his obscurantist tendencies.
Saying it is just that after reading the full text seems rather reductive and unfair.
That is certainly a likely side effect, of course. It may even be a desirable one, avoiding, or at least reducing, several classes of time wasting contributions (like the glut of single typo fixing pull requests that resulted from an ill-conceived contribution based competition a while back), especially for "open source but not open contribution" projects.
Some projects are not wanting to optimise for the number of contributors above other considerations.
De-facto standards are not standards.
Standards are properly discussed, and consensus is detected among the participants.
There was never a discussion on making Github an "industry standard".
The only reason things appeared simple in the past is because of GitHub's monopoly. As soon as you want to get rid of that, life gets more complicated. That is just another tradeoff you have to make.