Hello there. I have read over your post, and this paragraph is just quick summary of my reply. I fail to see your points valid, especially in overall picture, I do not see anything major where you can question the level of competency of Drago. The part about having knowledge or experience of DM is not correct. While it would be partially true if you were talking about Drago when they started coding and to the moment of their trial, if you look at Drago's ability to code in DM you will see a noticeable improvement which was seen to go up. It would be concerning and valid if their ability to code has remained the same since they joined the team, but that is just not true.
There is nothing wrong with creating PR that is "half-baked", as long as it is not a meme PR. There are tons of examples of WIP, PR drafts, and even PRs that are marked for review but they need improvement or finishing. The key point here is that when PR is seen by developers/contributors or even players are incomplete or lacks improvement a feedback to it is required. It is important to look at how the author of PR listens to the feedback, but they can still disagree. Disagreeing with someone is not the issue, it is about how you do it. People have different opinions, and on implementation especially. Maintainers usually are the people whose word is final, but even they have disagreement between each other from time to time.
In Drago's specific case I have looked over any recent PRs that were either not finished or received request/suggestion to change something. Their response is appropriate, it was either civilized discussion or they just decided to stop the project. It is okay for a person to stop a project if they do not agree with suggestions or requests, as long as the request/suggestion was fair and they do not do it out of taking it personally or leave it with salty remark or point it out.
Personally I have closed PR once where I disagreed with suggestion of another developer and I left a closing comment saying that I personally think that my PR/idea is being stolen by this developer. I got over that issue, I never attacked that developer and they talked to me. Eventually we came to agreement of them implementing it, which is the right way to resolve this issue. I have not observed anything as close as this in Drago's case recently.
That is interesting suggestion about benefit of learning more about DM. I would say there are still lots of developers who will benefit of learning more about DM, even skull has gaps and is being corrected. Now I say that, I do not mean that their DM knowledge is not enough, but Software Development is a field where you need to accept constant growth. Once you stop learning that's when you will stop having creative ideas. I do not agree that Drago has to take time to learn more about our community, since I think they know it very well. Especially being an active and experienced moderator, active developer, former lore developer and wiki maintainer. Drago has taken so many roles in their aurora career, and I do not meant it like since they have role everywhere they are automatically wise. But I mean that they have tapped in each area of our community with entirely different perspectives of different teams, that their experience and knowledge of the community is definitely greater than any staff on developer's team except for Alberyk.
I know that lots of Drago's PRs were closed because they were not able to actively maintain them up to date with master. Lots of their PRs had merge conflicts later on which are pain in the ass to solve and sometimes is not worth the time.
I carefully looked at Garlic PR. Arrow only issue with it was the sprite. Your suggestion was reasonable, but again it is author's privilege to disagree with anyone as long as they explain why. Drago did explain what is their opinion, and nobody has replied to their explanation since.
You are referring to vermin PR? That PR has different issues. Drago's review point out that your usage of global name lists(as opposed to local) is against our standards, unless it is absolutely required and used by different systems of code that cannot pass the list around easily. That was a valid point, their suggestion was for you to use existing configuration file of adjectives is also a good point. You replied with a partially good point. I say partially because it make sense that you want to have animal/class specific list of adjectives that cannot be easily put together into single file. Putting them into individual file would be another alternative, but it would not make sense if it scales up. In this case you would want to use local lists.
I do not see how having PR open for it is wrong. It is stale and can be closed, true. But that is not an issue I think at all, and does not work in your argument.
I honestly do not see issue here, there was lots of different opinions on whether that PR should be in or not. It was absolutely said by maintainers that we will test merge it and potentially merge it to just try out something new. We can always revert anything. Drago making that PR was not against dev team descriptor, nor by a whole or even a majority of community since opinions were again split almost 50%
Just because Lohikar thinks about something in a certain way does not mean it is right or true