Hacker News Reader

Comment by hmokiguess | Hacker News Reader

How ironic to see the comments here bringing exactly the kind of pressure he wants to walk away from. Skimming through the thread most seem to be telling him what to do instead of what he chose.

Dude is probably just tired and needs a break, maybe he comes back, regardless I am thankful for his work and wish him joy in life.

View on HN

Nah, you're just twisting things around. We are criticizing and calling out the rationale he's giving. Not even interested if he hears it. It's message to the public of the maintainers behavior. Not to him. He's got a right to do what he wants.

The critique is not about the demands for his time as a maintainer, which is what he is addressing, that no one here is complaining about. In fact, post folks have made it clear that they have no issue with it.

I didn't mean to say the critique isn't valid, nor did I say that, you're putting words in my mouth there. (Maybe we both like twisting things around?)

> I didn't mean to say the critique isn't valid, nor did I say that, you're putting words in my mouth there.

Is this performance art?

My take has always been that there's a mutual "no requirements other than basic human respect" that goes both ways between maintainers and users. It's totally valid for someone to decide they want to close the source for their repo for pretty much whatever reason they want, because they don't owe me anything; by the same logic, it's also totally valid for me to think that's a poor decision and voice my opinion about it in a public forum, as long as I'm not being disrespectful about it.

Indeed sir, I am simply pointing it out as I thought it to be something that stood out.

Fair enough!

I guess my view is that it's right and proper for people to point out invalid arguments, even if they're being made to justify something that the author has the right to do anyway.

But it's not an "invalid argument" to share your experience. Just like it's not an invalid argument to say you don't like chocolate ice cream.

"Just ignore people who reach out to you" and "Just don't get burned out" aren't pointing out an invalid argument, either. It's just peanut gallery nonsense.

Open source software is easy come, easy go. Part of that is accepting it when maintainers don't feel it's worth it anymore. And now with AI you basically have to choose between no contributors or a firehose of slop issues/PRs, something that changed overnight.

The article doesn't provide any support for the assertion that keeping the source code unreleased makes a bigger difference re: quantity of unwanted inbound communication than closing the conventional issue and PR channels. It instead equivocates between those two things. In that sense, its argument is invalid.

> it's not an "invalid argument" to share your experience

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy>

Reply on news.ycombinator.com