If you mainly use chatbots and you're trying not to fall behind on AI tools, this is where people waste time: a project blows up, you assume the support is already there, and you spend attention on hype instead of durability.
This case is why I use a harsher filter. The public GitHub repo shows about 48k stars and 7.9k forks. The public sponsor page still shows 1 visible sponsor. That gap is the point. A star is closer to a public like than a promise to keep the work alive. Stars show attention. Sponsors show responsibility. [C002]
What changed my read is that this wasn't obscure. On May 11, 2026, The Washington Post used the extracted instruction text behind chatbots to explain how AI products hide their rules. Attention traveled. Visible sponsorship still didn't.
So my rule now is simple: don't judge an update by its feature list. Judge it by whether it changes your next decision. This is only about public GitHub pages, so visible sponsors are not the same as total income, and one-time support may not stay visible here. sponsors / asgeirtj [C001] If someone you know is treating stars like a support metric, share this with them.