@dbat I've repeated the same simple point in every reply. If you still don't get it, I don't have time to convince you, sorry.

@dbat AI does not change those principles, so I see no need for additional AI-specific political nonsense. That said, I am not against having a minimal CONTRIBUTING.md file documenting those requirements, so I do not have to repeat them over and over. (2/2)

@dbat No, I did not. LLMs should be treated like any other tool. If someone wants to contribute to the project, the requirements are straightforward: the contribution must meet the project's quality standards and comply with the relevant licenses. That is both necessary and sufficient, and it has always been the case in serious software development. (1/2)

@dbat Never said that "slop machines" are fine; quite the contrary, in fact. We fully agree that non-locally trained LLMs cannot guarantee licensing terms, and that LLMs in general certainly cannot guarantee quality contributions, which are always subject to careful human review, whether they come from pure human labor, software output, or a combination of the two.

@dbat We only care about high-quality code and art that solve real-world problems for game developers. As long as our contributors can guarantee that quality while respecting our license terms and conditions, as well as those of others, everything is fine.

@dbat Plugin system is on the roadmap. Once that is in, you will be able to use whatever you feel it's right for you.

@dbat Scripting is Lua only. We don't plan to support any other scripting language. When plugin system becomes available, users will be able to add their own scripting layer if they so desire.