> The Scripts/bin thing is not specific to venv - for whatever reason, the original Windows implementation chose to use "Scripts" rather than "bin" 

That's irrelevant to the PR, which solves the problem in a compatible way.   There's no compatibility issues if a link is made to the activate script, rather than moving the directory at all.

> My guess is you would need to propose a PEP to move *everything* over from "Scripts" to "bin" in the Windows Python world

Certainly not.  That would break everything and would be a bad idea.

> This issue was already rejected before you added your PR so I'm not sure why you went to the trouble of creating a PR.

Because the issue was rejected due to come conflating logic and confusion as to what the underlying problem and issue is.

The venv system produces files specifically for activation on Windows which must and should reside in the Scripts directory.

The venv system also produces files for activation in a bash (or similar) shell.  This *should* reside in the bin directory (there is no o/s dependency here), and it should *also* reside in the Scripts directory ... for compatibility.

Expressed that way, it's clear what the solution is.   Hence the PR.