"ohhhh, punk has been made too widely palatable and for everyone. REAL punks are like presbyterian minister mr rogers!" there are still hardcore bands out there! you can go see them if you want! i bet this person would listen to the ramones and go "umm, he wants to sniff glue? are we glorifying drug addiction now? this is SO not punk!"
there are people in the notes going "yeah! this is so true!"
i think this is part of a broader trend of people feeling to need to justify everything they enjoy, it can't just be a show they remember fondly from when they were a kid, it needs to be punk
DIY isn't exclusive to punk, tho. Punk definitely pioneered it, punk is also likely to still be the genre with the biggest DIY subculture, but DIY as a mode of minimum-capital, non-exploitative, cooperative cultural production that's available to everyone can work in any scene that has diehard, enthusiastic fans. Does that mean that people who organize underground raves are techno punks? Does that mean metal bands that put out records DIY and go on tour sleeping on their fans couches are metal punks?
idk, i'm inclined to say no because then you're at "everything is punk" again. I don't think punk can be meaningfully defined as anything but an aesthetic and a vibe, and that aesthetic and that vibe are very closely tied to DIY, but are also very closely tied to "what if we start DIY, but then it works out too well and we become actual capitalists", aka how indie labels start, something which was also pioneered by punks. And that aesthetic has also from the very start been something that has been co-opted and monetized by established capitalist actors within the cultural industry, sellouts and posers have been a part of punk since before people started to call it punk. As soon as punk became noticeable, there were corporate ghouls who realized that a movement built around aggressive contrarianism was something you can market to suburban teens with rich parents, just as there have always been kids who've genuinely needed punk as a first step to reject the norms of capitalist society.
Punk also always had a revolutionary, liberatory and inclusive side to it and it always had a toxic, nihilist and exclusionary side to it, these have clashed with each other since the very start. As soon as there was hardcore, there were both subversive queer kids who found they could be themselves at punk shows and violent meatheads who went to shows to beat people up and be sex pests in the pit. I agree that the latter should have no part in the scene, but it takes work to keep them out. You have to watch out for people when you don't want punk to be a space that's only safe for white cishet boys who can hold their own in a fight. Building a punk scene that isn't awful, violent shit requires active struggle.