I certainly didn't mean to suggest that having a GitHub profile could be a negative. My point isn't about identifying red flags, but about pointing out areas that could be improved to make one's profile stand out - especially in the case of the person I was responding to. As someone who reviews numerous resumes, I'm providing insight into what I typically look for when I peruse a candidate's GitHub account, based on my personal experience. I don't disqualify someone based on their GitHub activity, but I do use it as an additional datapoint to help identify those who might stand out from their peers.

Just communicate clearly why it is how it is.

I've some GH repos whose quality I'm ashamed of today. But it's clear they were developed by a person with 12 years less experience than me today. It's clear it was just a hobby-project or clear that it wasn't ever meant to be continued this long. A line like "The code in X is a mess and needs a refactoring" is enough.

It is to me, when I researched candidates. When a ticket, todo or note shows that the author is clearly aware of the problems, and shows she/he can weigh off why (not) to fix that today, it tells -me- they are good in what they do.

A dev who shows to make decisions about quality, effort, workflows, based on experience and reasoning, to me, is worth a hundred devs that blindly follow The Sacrosanct Rule Of The Latest Cargo Cult Religion™. A dev who shows she/he grew over time, by showing "terrible" code in the past, to me, is worth a hundred devs that have been doing the exact same rituals for years or decades.

So, yes: by all means, show your worst stuff. But be sure it's clear that you know its "bad" and why.