There is an inherent unfairness in this industry If you are Anthropic, Cursor or another billion dollar company, you can do growth hacks and guerrilla marketing techniques like putting your brand into every commit of a user, and get away with it But if a tool like pi, opencode or even say vim or emacs tried to do that, they would be boo'ed Like, it happened to @herdrdev recently There was a feature where it asked if it could star the repo for you at startup, with exponential backoff if you said no. I thought it was a pretty smart and balanced thing to do Then apparently someone complained it was a dark pattern, and it got removed So WHAT if it is a dark pattern? You know what is the darkest? A public good losing out. If monopolists can do growth hacks, creators of public goods should be allowed to do it as well! In fact, I would say that if you benefit from those public goods, you are morally obliged not to criticize this stance Of course, we cannot expect e.g. @pidotdev or @openclaw to make this a default feature Therefore, I created the packages pi-must-win and openclaw-must-win Install them with: pi install npm:pi-must-win openclaw plugins install npm:openclaw-must-win They will add [email protected] and [email protected] as co-committers to code developed through these projects Overall, I propose the "X-must-win" naming scheme for plugins that independently add guerilla marketing into open source projects This absolves the creators of any "sin" and gives the community a way to support the growth of a project Open source must win! Repos are in the links below.