{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreigyyonoue65n2gu7kpnw6u5yzu4acb7zb2hvepd2qflngz3xqtely",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:pi6woz4d47bkuws673w2il2r/app.bsky.feed.post/3mlolcqh5hvc2"
  },
  "path": "/t/anti-llm-sentiment-considered-harmful/14008?page=6#post_111",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-12T18:27:04.000Z",
  "site": "https://discourse.haskell.org",
  "tags": [
    "github.com/swamp-agr/dawgdic",
    "Add contribution policy (+LLM) (#31)",
    "swamp-agr",
    "+70\n-0"
  ],
  "textContent": "I want to test the waters by adding LLM Contribution Policy in my own packages from now on.\n\ngithub.com/swamp-agr/dawgdic\n\n####  Add contribution policy (+LLM) (#31)\n\n`master` ← `add-contribution-guide`\n\nopened 06:05PM - 12 May 26 UTC\n\n\n\n            swamp-agr\n          \n\n\n+70\n-0\n\n\nAs stated, add contribution policy and provide extra clarification for LLM usage\n\nI would not add it anywhere I maintain but start with those packages that I built (there are not so much external contributions anyway).\n\nIf some bits resonate with you, feel free to re-use, modify and/or refer to it.\n\nPersonally I consider myself being very bad at predictions, so instead I would like to offer its very early draft. In the future I would like to see more researchers on community sentiment, mental state of maintainers, “density” of the generated code included in open source, funnels (such as opened/declined/reviewed/merged/closed/released/etc. requests) or any other researches happen. By requesting this information from contributors in semi-structural way in advance, we can collect more insights and later evaluate them.\n\n(I do not have a strong opinion about LLMs as of now. I am still experimenting with them, with both positive and negative outcomes, without any strong conclusions yet. (I also noticed, it is hard to make conclusions, they became outdated in a blink of an eye))",
  "title": "Anti-LLM Sentiment Considered Harmful"
}