[ringmaster]

There is clearly a niche for these small "CMS" tools, but let's be real about what these CMSes are generally not offering: User authentication, localization, custom field indexing, internal search...

Yes, it "manages content", thus is technically a "CMS". But at the level of many of these tools, so is my file system. At best, these tools are useful automated markdown renderers.

[kennywinker]

There are solutions to some of those things using other tools, e.g. use http://searchpath.io to add indexing.

I haven't tried with this system but you can probably use dropbox, and a shared directory to manage multi-user content editing.

[ringmaster]

There are plenty of free and full yet simple CMSes that also fully integrate these features, for no monthly fee.

[kennywinker]

There are some advantages to a static-file CMS, that would make someone chose them over a regular CMS.

I'm not invalidating your criticisms, but search, multi-user support, and localization aren't important to everybody.

Also the sentence "there are plenty of CMSes" is also possibly the most true statement ever made in the history of software.