They were reviewing perf designations, then pulling up PR count, then arguing against designation based on the number of PRs opened.
They were reviewing perf designations, then pulling up PR count, then arguing against designation based on the number of PRs opened.
That still doesn't clarify: were they saying "many PRs→good" or "many PRs→bad" or "number of PRs is irrelevant" or...?
That PRs == impact.