It was allowed to force push to the main branch. Not "made" by GitHub seems to be quite uncharitable nitpicking, when the bot has been blessed by GitHub and implicitly its actions endorsed.
In the spirit of your comment: Gas lighting is a classic pastime.
It force-pushed to a branch of its own fork, then closed its own pull request without merging it – both things any account can do. No GitHub blessing was ever involved.
And so we move from uninformed speculation to uninformed misinterpretation.
The woke movement is about power. It’s like “Anonymous” with better PR/public perception (good initial purpose, then it becomes a nom-de-guerre that anyone can take up)
People who choose to perform its language claim it’s about racial or gender outcomes. “Saints” lead the way in pursuing meaningful change, “believers” follow them.
Then, when “sociopaths” figure out how to use the blessed language to for _personal_ (or in-group) power grabs (and destory livelihoods in the process), one should call the followers “useful idiots”.
I see Uncle Bob doing a poor job of sympathetically articulating potential (or realized) issues with the moment*. And using words that aren’t from the right tribal dictionary. But I see respondents avoiding substantive responses and trying to tar and feather him for word choice. Cardinal Richelou’ing him.
> If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him. [1]
Your claim is bold and your proof is lacking.
You won't be spared because you agree (or claim to). I hope your performative martyrdom here satisfies you, because your imagined allies Do. Not. Care.
People acting like bad NLP software. Finding banned words instead of constructing parse trees.
Thank you for being clear about the backing of your claims. I find them thin.
This response is hardly site-guidelines worthy. Sorry.
This too is just letting flow?