[askafriend]

> You misunderstand my point, which is that only “genuine attempts” matter in this particular case.

I'm sorry but you don't get to decide what matters.

Users will decide that for you. And the truth is nobody gives a fuck about sourcehut or whatever other project enough to honor it with a "genuine attempt".

Nobody is going to slow down to wade through the unreadable, mess of information splattered on the page just because it's there and available.

So if that's the assumption you're building with, you'll be hosed.

It's important to design for how people actually use things, and how people actually behave, and the information customers are actually looking for.

[zapzupnz]

It's the principle of "if Muhammad won't come to the mountain, bring the mountain to Muhammad". Or whatever other name you prefer, same principle.

The hubris of the technologically competent, one so often spied on this website, is to believe that those unwilling to join them on the top of the mountain don't deserve the mountain, rather than that a ski lift should be installed.

It's as though the democratisation of technology over the past thirty years has completely escaped their attention.

[jckzlg]

In this case the mountain is web-hosted git repos? This particular mountain already has at least 3 ski lifts you might have heard of called GitHub, GitLab, and Bitbucket.

[jckzlg]

When I say “matter” I’m not being normative, I’m saying that this particular tool’s value add has nothing to do with its discoverability on the World Wide Web. Sourcehut’s website is a signpost not an advertisement. The set of users who are put off by the design but would have otherwise used the tool is negligible. Comparing sourcehut’s design to Stripe is like comparing a Camry to a dune buggy.