Well, that's a good thing. Being "neutral" _is_ taking a side. It means you're taking an amoral stance even in big questions.
Every organization has a stance. We're just become used to companies that take a stance of "as long as we get paid".
Every organization has a stance. We're just become used to companies that take a stance of "as long as we get paid".
Clearly some things are harmful enough that they should be banned.
Many of us are capable of more nuance that that and don't apply the label "slop" to everything where generative AI is involved. The linked Mastodon shows no nuance, and neither does your reply.
Two things can be true at once: GitHub has degraded into a "slop" cesspit and that agentic tooling has legitimate use cases.
Finally people can also legitimately object to a host mandating what tools can be used in authorship even if they don't particularly care for those tools themselves.