Good chance you wouldn't be writing good bug reports either, then. Github issues have enough noise that a first-pass filter like this feels like a good idea, even if it has some false positives.
This in no way aligns with reality. I frequently interact with users who can’t code at all but make good bug reports. One of the best ways to ensure success is to have a form (GitHub allows creating those) which describe exactly what is necessary and guide people in the right direction.
What you're saying is even worse, since you’re implying someone could be an expert computer programmer or power user, but because they’re unfamiliar with the specific language this project chose, they are incapable of making good bug reports. That makes no sense.
This isn't really a metric though. It's a formal existence proof that the bug exists. The key difference IMO is that you have to create a test which A) looks (to the maintainer) like it should pass, while simultaneously B) not passing. It's much harder to game.
There are other cases where Goodharts Law fails as well: consider quant firms, where the "metric" used to judge a trader is basically how much money you pull in. Seems to be working fine for them
