Rather, now that it is officially a reason to reject submissions the sloppers cannot complain about unfairness.

And it will be easy to tell because they won't understand their own PR.

You know those heavy genAI users ain't smart enough to be able to not disclose it anymore. The long time users have probably atrophied their brains so much that they would probably just copy the whole genAI response into their contributions and then complain when they get rejected or get extremely defensive if asked to explain the code they put forth.

I ain't banking on the intelligence of genAI users to be smart.

AI contributions that you can't obviously tell are AI contributions are less a concern.

If you can tell it's AI slop, that's really the concern.

If it's an AI assisted quick fix for something, then you might not tell (except the description in the pull request can bury the explanation in a sea of LLM crap). You can review it, maybe a bit more guarded knowing that "looking right" is no longer as strong an indicator as it used to be, and make a decent decision.

But when people unleash the firehose and it's too much volume, then a nice policy to just ignore. If you aren't sure, you can look at the developer's general activity and see hundreds of commits a day across dozens of projects... yeah that's a vibe coder.