KDE's AI-Usage Debate and the Case for Restrictive Guidelines

Summary

A KDE contributor recounts an attempt to develop stricter guidelines for large language model use after developers complained about a flood of low-quality, AI-generated merge requests. The draft said such submissions could be ignored or closed, but work on it stalled before a second proposal was reopened on KDE's GitLab. The debate intensified after a talk proposing a “lovable, sovereign, AI-native KDE” was accepted at Akademy 2026 and reportedly received a chilly reception, followed by a similarly received workshop. The later discussion was derailed by two outsiders arguing about AI morality; one doxxed the other, both were eventually banned for their conduct, and an external campaign urged KDE to ban LLMs. KDE then removed the draft and hid the discussion. The author clarifies that KDE e.V. did not take money from DHH or Omarchy, while a donation from Framework followed verification that Framework had cut its limited ties with them. The author says the AI-native proposal does not represent KDE's overall direction, while acknowledging both serious concerns about LLMs and their usefulness to experienced practitioners. Any future policy effort, the author argues, should focus on reducing harmful AI-generated submissions without turning the process into personal attacks or a wider fight over AI itself.