
Judging the Stupidity of GitHub Projects by Stars and Forks - ayi
http://ericgreer.info/github/funny/stupidity/2016/02/28/judging-the-stupidity-of-github-projects.html
======
KingMob
As opposed to judging the stupidity of blog posts by how facile their analyses
are?

"I think this metric is much more accurate than you might first assume", and
yet when looking at one of the "stupidest" projects, Jekyll Now, step number
one in the README is literally "fork this project". And in this case, it makes
_perfect_ sense, since the goal is to get a yourusername.github.io blog up.
That wouldn't be possible if they _didn 't_ fork.

At a much more basic level, this article conflates stupidity with a) making
custom alterations that are never propagated back to the original project, b)
misguided enthusiasm for working on a project and c) inexperience with git and
GitHub instead of stupidity, per se.

I suspect a, b, and c account for a huge fraction of the forks. I, myself,
have forked projects I respected and wanted to contribute to, but never got
around to. But since there's no penalty for unused forks, users have no
incentive to clean up their project list.

