1. 8
  1.  

  2. 3

    When the first thing I’m greeted with on your page is styling using spaces instead of css, I can’t take you seriously.

    1. 5

      There must be a large misunderstanding. I propose you read https://len.falken.directory/misc/writing-for-the-internet-across-a-human-lifetime.txt first. Then maybe re-read this article.

      I’m not looking to be “taken seriously”, I’m looking to get people writing with the lowest friction possible. I fully support all the other “small web” initiatives that attempt the same. The subset of HTML people are using lately, and markdown, are perfectly good other alternatives.

      I do believe “website as an rss feed” is something that could be adopted more, and it is, but other than that the rest is up to anyone.

      I consider this particular journey a failure because I’m unable to get plain text into more people’s hands.

      I also don’t know if you even read the article because it pokes at people making similar comments. The fact you won’t be considerate at all because of such a subtly is offensive, really. There is zero constructiveness in your comment.

      1. 2

        I also don’t know if you even read the article

        I did, but it did not change my impression.

        There is zero constructiveness in your comment.

        It is an impression that I think you’ve failed in your goal to have a low-friction, engaging content medium. I think your goal is laudable, but I’m not sure about your approach. I think “website as an rss feed” is neat, but extremely niche. I think you’ve conflated “low-tech” with “good approach” when you reference webpages or research document of old. I think they would have loved to be able to style their tables or documents to be more appealing to readers since people reaching the conclusion is important.

        I didn’t mean to be non-constructive, I was only giving an impression of what I saw. For what it’s worth, my Firefox Developer edition rendered your page without any fuss, so I only noticed after your response that the content type was even text/plain.

        1. 1

          It is an impression that I think you’ve failed in your goal to have a low-friction, engaging content medium.

          Your impression was actually “I can’t take you seriously because you use spaces to typeset”. Why are you pivoting now?

          I did, but it did not change my impression.

          So you read the article and still all you can comment on is using spacing for typesetting?

          I’m not sure about your approach.

          Well then care to comment about the problems with the approach? This has been the only system I’ve been able to use consistently for 2 years, and I’ve been writing for about 7.

          There are others who have been inspired by the writing method, such as https://shinobi.website. Clearly usage is some evidence to the validity of the approach.

          I think […] is neat, but extremely niche.

          Technically people using static website blogs are niche too if we consider most people are posting on instagram, medium, twitter, and many others. But more importantly why does it have to be popular immediately?

          loved to be able to style their tables or documents

          For sure! But there are a lot of people who don’t care either about this. Did you not read what I wrote about markdown or subset of HTML being just fine?

          I didn’t mean to be non-constructive

          Given what you wrote it’s very hard to believe this… Lot’s of “I think” and not much elaboration on anything…

          “The system” absolutely needs criticism (it’s why I tried to make plain text links clickable), but “I think X” with no substantiation is just not criticism!

      2. 3

        Even using “reader mode” view in Firefox, an accessibility tool, it becomes hard to read - lines are broken with line-break characters so paragraphs are laid out awkwardly.

        1. 1

          And in Chromium it’s perfectly readable depending who you ask, but, Firefox actually does it correctly, because the link-breaks are part of the pre-formatting.

      3. 1

        Cute extension, but immediately upon opening the Chrome store page I see on the screenshot that it does not handle the URL inside parentheses correctly. Besides ), trailing characters like ], }, >, !, and quotes at least should be trimmed off.

        1. 1

          Thanks for the catch; the URL regex is fairly rudimentary so it’s bound to happen, I’ll fix it as soon as I can!