WSL/wsl-config.md: rewrite lead for clarity by multiplealiases · Pull Request #2021 · MicrosoftDocs/WSL
github.com
This is a rewrite of the lead section, as I feel the previous one was overly long-winded, yet did not meaningfully summarize the most important points of the article in a way that enables readers t...

It was merged after they where rightfully ridiculed by the community.

The awful response to the backlash by matwojo really takes the cake:

I’ve learned today that you are sensitive to ensuring human readability over any concerns in regard to AI consumption

  • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    40·
    11 days ago

    They excused it as “I’m overworked” which… fair enough, but that doesn’t excuse this. I blame Microsoft, not this fella.

    • Kissaki@programming.devEnglish
      5·
      9 days ago

      Later, they comment:

      I’ve learned today that you are sensitive to ensuring human readability over any concerns in regard to AI consumption

      Their takeaway from

      1. They reject with one of the reasons, and the only disclosed reason, being AI is worse at reading the form
      2. Community says AI readability should not be a priority over human readability
      3. That it may not even be a problem for AI to read
      4. Suggest at least considering an improvement in a form that both can read well

      is that the community wants to “ensure human readability over any concerns in regard to AI”.

      I don’t think this is only about MS or being overworked. Yes, it was a harsh push-back. But they’re responding passive aggressively, claiming the community pushes the other/an extreme when, to me very clearly, it does not.

      Maybe you can say that conclusion is also due do being overworked and not investing the time to read through the comments. But I dunno. There’s no need to reply in that passive aggressive tone and claiming unreasonable things.