I’m not the OP, nor am I very good at succinctly summarizing what’s in my head in a way that I’m confident would do the topic justice.
The specific term you probably want to look up is “Linear no threshold”.
I think the video Kyle Hill did several months ago though covers the topic very well though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzdLdNRaPKc
I have some small nitpicks on how exactly he argued a couple of his points, but his over all point seems reasonable.
Would it make any sense to switch to some kind of physical application process? Not necessarily in person, but require the applications/résumés be mailed in? The advantage that these automated models have is that they are basically for the user to submit as many applications as possible. Requiring that the application be physically mailed would create at least some small barrier and cost that would mean the applicants wouldn’t be able to apply a near infinite number of times.
You say that, but I really don’t think the current incentive structure is working AT ALL. The amount of work and problems I have seen and also been able to solve with a small group of people who really cared has been orders more than the amount of work that has been accomplished when the organization is mixed with people who are there because they were told the money was good. Bodies don’t solve problems, if anything they create problems.
Teaching is an excellent example. Teachers should be paid way more than I get paid way more than I do considering how foundational they are to the the development and future of our society and yet they are paid significantly less and treated quite poorly. While that has been true for a not insignificant amount of time, it is only very recently that the negatives of the job have outweighed the passion a lot of people had for it.
I’m not saying I have all the answers, and I’m faaaaarrrr from an atypical human being, but at least in most of the jobs I have ever worked in I would find my work easier and more productive with fewer people who really wanted to be there, and I myself find doing nothing more exhausting and draining than being busy. If I don’t have work or problems to solve I’ll find them because I enjoy doing them.
I actually think that might be a good thing. I’d still chose to be an engineer in that scenario. Something that’s bothered me for a while are people in professions because they pay well not because they are good at them or enjoy them. I don’t blame the person, they are just trying to support themselves and their family in this one life they have to live. I’m bothered by the system that forces them to make that decision.
LawfulMasses did a video covering this exact question a week or two ago and explained the relevant details in what seemed to be a fairly clear manner. Keeping in mind that he is a lawyer but is arguing in favor of consumer rights and the AGPL so there may be a valid counter argument.
I don’t think I would be doing a disservice to try and summarize what he stated in the video, but my takeaway was that the plugin was an attempt to dodge the AGPL, but the AGPL specifically has measures for that kind of tomfoolery.
Video if anyone is interested.
Why are you quoting item #3 from their list without the full context of the statement? They aren’t saying the code should be accepted or used. They are basically saying don’t automatically assume malicious intent on the contributor and instead use it as an opportunity to potentially teach that contributor about why that kind of contribution will be rejected and what they could do instead. It’s all about outreach.