mou makes its funding goal for a 1.0 release

ubi de feo ubi at
Mon Nov 10 01:20:36 EST 2014

I keep using Mou beta here and there, 
like the simplicity of its UI. it sorta plain works for (leave the sometimes odd alignment between MD and preview panes, 
that's often not perfect in any split editor I've seen).

to me Mou's indie-gogo campaign feels like "let's try and milk this crowd-funding cow with M shaped stands".
haven't tried MacDown yet, as most of my MD is typed in SublimeText > Marked 2 anyway, 
but this week I'll gladly give it a shot and see for myself.

I don't have specific MD needs, I'm not a purist, should such a thing exist.
it works great to lift some of the pain from my workflow(s), when I ever get the chance to sit down and write something.

I support MD as an open effort, but I feel it will never really be a standard.
it is enjoying a worse fate than HTML in 1999 with all the differences across its "dialects".
this ML – and I've only been here for a year or so – is a collection of efforts, drafts (at least one per quarter), religion and despair,
when it comes to defining a standard for MarkDown.

I respect everyone contributing, and enjoy following the development of Gruber's original idea,
but get the feeling (...) that, in the end, he doesn't care.
I mostly like reading the discussions, although I rarely participate,
as I believe in acquiring knowledge of something before talking about it.

I'm looking forward to whatever replaces MarkDown, as long as it does the job without trying to please everyone and do everything.
I believe Homer Simpson's dream car has already been mentioned here a few times.

my apologies for dropping these two cents


ubi de feo
creative technologist

Hello, Savants!

Egelantiersgracht 620
1015RS Amsterdam
The Netherlands
m	+31 6 46027890

Sa•vant | saˈvänt; sə- |
a learned person, esp. a distinguished scientist.

On 10 Nov 2014, at 04:03, bowerbird via Markdown-Discuss <markdown-discuss at> wrote:

> mou, as you may know, is a markdown editor.
> with its second $5,000 company sponsorship,
> mou has reached it's $20,000 indigogo goal...
> albeit, the effort engendered some resistance:
> the big thorn is that, because mou's developer
> has lost interest in the project, trying to sell it,
> a mou user stepped up to code an equivalent.
> that led the mou developer to resume his effort,
> issuing proclamations about "the crappy clones"
> in his campaign to raise $20,000 to release 1.0.
> (in all the time it's been out, mou's been "beta";
> the goal to open-source the code is $100,000.)
> i take no side in this dog-fight.
> i have no argument with developers getting paid.
> and i am not religious on the open-source sauce.
> i even think open-source/proprietary tension can
> -- in some cases -- create benefits for both sides.
> i also believe in supporting developers who have
> built a tool that i use constantly, like my text-editor.
> i've paid the mere $15 asked by the tex-edit guy
> several times, because i appreciate it that much.
> i just paid it again, because i appreciate the app.
> i'm curious, however, if anyone cares to voice any
> opinion about how such tension should shake out.
> because it's certainly possible to release code that
> lets people have a light-markup editing environment.
> i'm about to do that, on the way to doing other stuff,
> just because it is nearly an inevitable consequence.
> i'm sure you've all realized that there are a ton of
> free web-based markdown editors out there today.
> it's gonna be harder and harder, it seems to me, for
> any app developers to "add value" to what's coming,
> in a sufficient way so many users will end up paying.
> but maybe i'm wrong?
> -bowerbird
> _______________________________________________
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss at

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Markdown-Discuss mailing list