=> Re: "superTXT" | In: s/SmallWeb
alright everyone I think I've got it. I didn't expect 28 comments on this today, but I see what you both /all are saying, so thank you. I think we can all agree that it's neat but just not viable at the moment.
2024-01-09 ยท 1 year ago
=> ๐ฅ๏ธ admin ยท 2024-01-10 at 11:46:
Leave me the hell alone, gosh dang!
This is a group discussion, @clseibold, not a competition on who gets the most factual details right. If you don't want someone to talk to you, feel free to mute them (temporarily, if that helps).
I've given you a flair.
=> ๐ Singletona082 ยท Jan 16 at 13:42:
I feel conflicted. On the one hand 'Cool people are tryingto solve what they see as a problem and are Doing rather than Talking.' On the other 'You're fragmenting an existing protocol that already has (comparitively) few users. Leave it alone please.'
superTXT โ so I'm trying to wrap my mind around this SuperTXT protocol but I'm just not understanding it all that well. It seems to be a version of gemtext that is accessed via SSH based tools. I haven't tried the graphical browser but was wondering if this is the basis of it?
=> ๐ฌ gritty ยท 19 comments ยท 1 like ยท 2024-01-09 ยท 1 year ago This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini; charset=utf-8