[WarOnPrivacy]

> who's us in that sentence?

Everyone in this thread.

> it is perfectly acceptable for a member of that community to express a little disdain.

Okay. I never inferred otherwise. If venting is the total of your goal here are you okay we blow that off or is there something else you're hoping for?

To be clear, I've no animosity toward your posts. My 'hidden' agenda is this: Because hostility takes a toll on the recipients (us), I'm curious if what you're getting in return is worth it.

No judgment. We all do this.

[arm]

> “Because hostility takes a toll on the recipients (us), I'm curious if what you're getting in return is worth it.”

We aren’t the recipients of the hostility; Netgate is. I feel no hostility directed towards me when reading anfogoat’s post. In fact, I thank them for openly expressing their disdain towards Netgate here, as it gives others like me more information to look into and come to our own conclusions on.

[anfogoat]

> To be clear, I've no animosity toward your posts.

No worries, no animosity assumed.

> If venting is the total of your goal here are you okay we blow that off or is there something else you're hoping for?

I don't like venting. I said I was scratching an itch but venting makes it sound like it had no substance at all and suggests what Netgate did was alright. To be clear, I think the more Netgate gets criticized and called out the better. But I had no hopes beyond that.

> My 'hidden' agenda is this: Because hostility takes a toll on the recipients (us) ...

Putting aside that I'm not completely on board with the hostility characterization either, you're recipients of it only in the sense that you happened to read it. I disagree with you about the degree to which Netgate deserves the criticism of course, but none of the "hostility" was addressed to you or anyone else in this thread.

It shouldn't be taxing. It's pick-me-up to anyone who's read one too many overly positive comments about the pfSense Plus shenanigans.