Ok, repo age being one of hundreds of red flags. Each of these can be auto-detected. But each auto-detection rule will be known and can be gamed afterwards.
Someone might grab an old repository and just keep force-pushing new content and thus repurposing it, but if you can find a quick check against that (probably a log somewhere), I think it has a fairly good chance of weeding out the noise.
There's also some form of outcome bias here. You're judging the resource/repository/library/whatever from today's learnings and standards, but it took this amount of time to reach here, maybe do-over multiple times, 100s or 1000s of commits and clearly none of these were there when it was only 6h old.
“Must have six months of active development” beats every slop I’ve seen yet (and we’ll see in six months, but vibe coding has already existed for longer). “Must appear in a popular app (by my judgement), be vouched by someone I trust, or exist before 2024” would probably accept most legitimate “awesome” repos.
If it can’t follow a simple checklist, it shouldn’t be a problem, because you don’t even see the PR, because it should be auto-closed.
> How on earth a 6h old repository with zero user is considered "awesome"
It’s not, and you can write a bot that auto-closes such PRs (and any PR from an obviously AI account, and I wish pangram was cheaper, but any PR that is obviously AI text).