This is disingenuous as shit. How does anyone who has a passing familiarity with minimalism have the nerve to write 'how is it possible to be “the best” while offering less?' Especially with the admission later in the article that yes, he designs tools with deliberate constraints.
I could certainly get behind an article arguing that Medium is bad for writers because of the centralization, loss of control of audience, etc. But this one isn't it, because it doesn't appear to acknowledge that some writers don't want to automate their own Wordpress themes (except with the dismissive 'if you really believe that' aside which I'm not counting).
> How does anyone who has a passing familiarity with minimalism have the nerve to write 'how is it possible to be “the best” while offering less?'
Minimalism is not about offering less. Minimalism is about offering more, and presenting less — "more" here meaning depth of experience, in the broad sense. I think that is what he is suggesting, especially easy to discern in the context of his main thesis (that Medium isn't minimalist, it is homogeneity).
I could certainly get behind an article arguing that Medium is bad for writers because of the centralization, loss of control of audience, etc. But this one isn't it, because it doesn't appear to acknowledge that some writers don't want to automate their own Wordpress themes (except with the dismissive 'if you really believe that' aside which I'm not counting).