A request for posts to stay *djot-centered*

[vassudanagunta]

I originally wrote the following to be a comment under #366, but then I thought it would be off-topic there.

I follow all the djot and commonmark discussions because of my interest in lightweight markup and my own projects in that domain.

@dereuromark, I have to say, recently most of the notifications I get from the djot repo are triggered by your posts. It is a lot. Many multiples of @jgm's messages and I think multiples of everyone else's combined. While some are good comments about djot design (more true in the past than recently), many appear to me as thinly veiled promotion of Carve, an attempt to capture djot eyeballs or as an SEO strategy, increasing links from Markdown, CommonMark, Pandoc and even @jgm to Carve. A github search for "carve" across the jgm's repos yields mentions in 30 issues and 10 discussions, with actual comments being multiples of that since you tend to post multiple times under each, not to mention that the average length of your individual posts themselves likely outstrips everyone else's.

I've been feeling this for a while, but the pandoc-format-fidelity.pdf which you link above really took the cake. A more honest title would be, "Carve tops the round-trip fidelity for Pandoc", the emphasized part being a quote of a heading in the content, because there is no doubt that the document had an agenda. It's not at all on topic -- Carve is not a djot extension or interpretation nor a solution to djot fragmentation.

Perhaps it is not my place to say any of this, this being @jgm's repo, not mine -- though it does impact me and I think other djot followers. The volume of your posts drowns out discussion genuinely focused on djot. I won't say any more on this topic, or respond to replies. I already feel a little bad for making this post.

Apologies, @jgm, if this is unwelcome or unconstructive. I won't object if you delete this discussion.

[dereuromark]

A lot of it directly contributes back into djot.
So while i understand you to some extend, this goes somwwhat against the open source thought you claim to support no?

[dereuromark]

Recently example:
jgm/djot.js#159
Or
jgm/djot.js#158

Those are found by running comparison and benchmark tools over the code.
Instead of just doing it for me I chose to also offer solutions here.

[jgm]

I want to agree with both of you. @dereuromark has contributed usefully to djot, and these contributions are welcome! But I would encourage him to think about the extent to which some of his posts come across as SEO promotion for his own project. (@vassudanagunta is not the only one to have complained about this.) Let's keep it djot-focused here.