Is there, at least theoretically, a way to prevent other people from pushing to my repo? That seems like it would suck re griefing for any project that might become even mildly politically sensitive for whatever reason.
I'd suggest reading https://github.com/noffle/git-ssb-intro to get an idea.
I'd be surprised if there was no security for pushes. The repos I've worked on did require an invite from the creator.
Here is a description of a model that embraces both any-one-can-edit with degrees of consensus on who is allowed to edit. http://viewer.scuttlebot.io/%25GKmZNjjB3voORbvg8Jm4Jy2r0tvJj... but if you decide that someone cannot edit it, from there perspective they still can, but they are just excluded from your perspective.
Once you have that very, very basic ability to replicate what people expect when they subscribe to a person's git repository, you can start playing with automatically merging together people's changes - but in practice, merge conflicts are a thing and there's no good way to resolve them. If you can come up with a way to automatically resolve merge conflicts, you'd be rich, frankly speaking.
so I answered, _yes, theoretically_ we have ideas for how to implement that. you can also unfollow and block griefers, but so far pretty much everyone has been nice and we just havn't needed to implement that yet.
Why is this not resolved by a good permissions model and the ability to fork? Why should my users have to care about blocking griefers when they just want to pull from repo?