All the maintainers of the most popular repos on GitHub seem to habit of asserting dominance in response to any questions raised about their software.
For example, I am learning to use this one simulation software and one of the flags is called "--directory", which is the directory the result of the simulation is outputted to. I tried entering directories on my computer but every directory name I entered it would say "invalid path". Then I found a line of code that essentially said to say "invalid path" if the input is a directory, which is the logical opposite of what I expected. I bring this up on the "issues" page on the repo and the developer prefaced his response by saying that the "--directory" flag is doing exactly what it is supposed to do, and that since the program creates the directory I must enter a non-existent directory. He later says that it could be argued that it should instead say "error directory exists" instead of "invalid path". Of course it should say that you piece of shit. It's not "it could be argued".
It seems like software developers get to where they are by always asserting dominance and never admitting responsibility. They maintain their image of being experts by never admitting they are wrong. And this is how they get ahead. In this case, this guy was someone who inherited the software from someone else - he wasn't the original developer. But he most likely gained control of it by always acting like a knowledgeable expert on programming.
I don't think this about dominance. Member of modern culture are vile human scum, and I think they subconsciously realize that something is wrong, and this makes them into emotionally insecure snowflake who can't tolerate even a hint of criticism. So I think this is the issue here.