Thank you, saagarjha, for pointing this out. There is a huge difference in having your argument criticized (possibly even dissected and dismembered, if necessary!) and what has been said here.
As someone being responded to, I'm frankly rather disturbed. It'd be pure weasel-words to say "Oh, I was talking in general and didn't mean this about anyone specifically". Consider the word structure alone:
You and people like you
shrill voices, tight small box, radical conservatism ... pissed off vocal folk, can't stand / gotten better, hate, hate, angry mob, really*7 hate, no reason, no kindness, angry, limited horizon, limited vision, deep rooted desire to choke
Me and the web
gotten better & better, richer, powerful, exciting, creative, empowered, easy, rich, incredibly*2 sad, grow and thrive
My real concern is that rektide isn't sitting in a chair deliberately attacking people, but trying to make a passionate plea in favor of something they love. I respect that and fundamentally agree with your general premise. But what incredible venom to toss into people's face and either have no clue or not care.
my defensive of something I love, which gas grown & flourished, & which is now being assaulted by a preconception that it must fit some other smaller view is venom to you? I'm not sure that I can see how better to do this non violently while still advocating the truth of this situation. suggestions welcome.
I could definitely tone it down, try to pad my defense for your sake. I feel enormous commitment to this though, and even acting a fool, arguing ineffectively, feels necessary given the despair of this strident assault the one open growing standards based medium that the world has been suffering lately. that you feel bad weighs against a very very real damage actively & ongoingly being done by this vocal anti web reactionary movement.
This hasn't been a defense. You've not offered a single criticism, alternative perspective, or insight about whether web applications should be file handlers and what doing (or not doing that) means for the web as a whole. You aren't arguing ineffectively -- you're not even arguing. If suggestions really are welcome, I suggest you argue, but I have a feeling where this goes: the "other side" doesn't have ideas worth legitimizing through discussion and it's already been exhausting enough.
This is nothing but verbal abusive about people you associate with an idea you hate because they offered criticism against a specific idea around how the web and browser might change.
And you're ready to be violent about it?
Are we really talking about a potential web browser improvement here?
> The web is already ridiculously feature-bloated. The scope of it is reckless. The madness of adding new features to a browser for every little use case needs to end.
This is what I was replying to. There's no arguments here either. This is emotional manipulation against a growable web. It's zeal & negative energy, concentrated.
> Having a thick interface between your files and websites is a feature, not a bug.
This is you mr-wendel. This is what I am arguing is wrong. I see no arguments to argue with. I just see bias and negativity. You wanted to define the web as a small narrow thing. You made no assertions no arguments. But such anger, such negative energy feels enormously trendy & popular recently.
As someone being responded to, I'm frankly rather disturbed. It'd be pure weasel-words to say "Oh, I was talking in general and didn't mean this about anyone specifically". Consider the word structure alone:
You and people like you
Me and the web My real concern is that rektide isn't sitting in a chair deliberately attacking people, but trying to make a passionate plea in favor of something they love. I respect that and fundamentally agree with your general premise. But what incredible venom to toss into people's face and either have no clue or not care.