[utybo]

Logseq is great, but I definitely agree that everything around it (docs, website, ...) is terrible. They really need to rework their marketing pitch and give proper docs. Right now you have docs scattered across 3 websites, and the only useful one is made in Logseq itself, which isn't a good system for scaling documentation.

[kirso]

The sad part is that the tool is really underrated.

You don't need to even think where to put notes.

All that overwhelm that all the folks are speaking about, just start writing in your daily page, when you look back -> you have a clear link.

It actually kills ambiguity without having folders and having too much un-needed structure (obviously use-case varies).

Logseq doesn't need plugins because a lot of it is already in-built (tasks, block-references, in-built queries).

It reminds me of the discussion when people praise Next.js for all the packages, and ecosystem but its not a feature, there is a reason people building these.

[bayindirh]

I think an application's usefulness depends on how much you align with its design and mindset it brings to the table.

For some people, stuffing pages into a notebook (a-la Evernote/Joplin) is fine. I use Evernote, and it's fine for most things.

However when things start to get crowded, this model breaks down. I also don't like shoving things into an application and meta-sort it with tags and whatnot. I like structured work, because I can put clutter aside in the structure and focus on what I'm working on.

Also, having the files as plain Markdown files is a plus for me, even if it doesn't have the block references. As I already said, I need Obsidian for document and knowhow management, and glorified text files are what I exactly want.