💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 005452.gmi captured on 2023-11-14 at 10:05:27. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Drew DeVault sir at cmpwn.com
Mon Feb 22 15:42:21 GMT 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I really don't like this mailing list, because Gemini is lightning in abottle and this list is constantly trying to open the bottle. But alas,here we are again.
I'm sorry for putting the stick on the table upfront; in hindsight itwas rude. I always prefer friendly negotiation first. However: Gemini isconstantly at a dire risk of being extended upon, a pattern which willultimately drive it to suffer the fate of the very problems of the webwhich motivated its creation in the first place. I like Gemini, and ifwe want Gemini to continue being likable, then it cannot grow in thisfashion.
This is not the first time we've dealt with this problem. This mailinglist is a constant stream of pleas for spec additions. Inline styles,inline images, tables, forms and POST equivalents, the list goes on andon and on. This mailing list is obsessed with reinventing the web, andthat's NOT what Gemini is for. Solderpunk has been quite clear on this.
The only means we have of regulating this behavior is by making astatement with our client and server implementations. This is not thefirst such statement I've made. First I stated that I would require SNI:
https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/2020/003160.html
This was added to the spec shortly thereafter.
I also made a statement regarding robots.txt:
https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/2020/003506.html
In this case: surprise, portals are just user agents, and blocking themis blocking users. Dick move.
Most recently, favicons. Contrary to Sean's nasty comments, I am onlymaking statements on behalf of *my* software, not Gemini as a whole, andI have every right to. You have every right to make statements on behalfof your software, too. Clients like Amfora have already done so byimplementing favicons. Mine is a statement of opposition, and we willultimately have to come to some kind of consensus. This is how protocolecosystems work.
Mozz, your extensions are irresponsible. You view this medium as achanging, evolving platform, and accept the consequences as it isfleeting and ultimately doomed to ruin.
Fuck that.
We have a good thing here, and deliberately and recklessly fattening itis going to screw it up for everyone. Take some responsibility for yourrole in making this platform thrive for as long as it can. Thishistorical revisionism about how Gemini is a platform for Gophers tofeed their creativity into expanding upon Gopher's limitations isridiculous. The purpose of Gemini has always been crystal clear. Thespec has received only minor clarifications and has always come with thefollowing promises:
- Any changes will not require drastic changes in implementations- It will be frozen once time has proven it correct
Solderpunk reaffirmed this on the new year.
What you're advocating for is not what Gemini is supposed to be. If youwant that, then fine, go make it in another protocol. Stop trying toopen our lightining bottle. Please.
Finally, to clarify the role of srht.site: I did not intend to issue anunstated threat of leveraging srht.site's influence to strong-arm Amforain this respect. There is not a case of "deliberate timing" here. Mystatement regarding the possibility of black holeing was only withrespect to gmnisrv, which is a minority player in the field of Geminiservers. I don't intend to shove this view onto all users of srht.site -that's well beyond the scope of appropriate influence. I understand whythis was not clear, and I'm sorry for the confusion.