Wow, awful awful take.

The counterargument against the 'team of one' argument codeberg made completely glosses over the argument that codeberg was making: that llm projects often include unnecessary tooling that requires more of codeberg's resources than their userbase really needs. The fact that one person projects have always existed does not address the argument, it is a complete red herring.

Their proposed solution is to create a for-profit section of codeberg so that vibe coders are still allowed while not costing brain users more. Why? Honestly why? Just go somewhere else at that point. Why should codeberg create a safe space for you?

The censorship thing is absolutely ridiculous too. Codeberg is not the government, terms of service that you consent to are not forcing censorship on anybody. That's a reactionary slop argument, and only serves to belittle and normalize the harm that actual censorship of science, art, political opinions, and book banning, that right wing governments like the US are causing today.

The process argument is just wrong too, and that's been addressed by others, but it's still such a weak argument anyways when the service is free and your level of involvement is entirely up to you.