I'm ok with Jack Kerouac stream-of-conscious, but not Clint Eastwood stream-of-conscious. Any thoughts?
8 karma · joined August 7, 2023
Personally, I'm an introvert. I prefer reading and writing to talking in large groups. I admire thoughtful responses. I like low-tech games and slow-social interactions. I spent a portion of my life in the limelight and am now happy in pseudonymity/anonymity. I used to spend a lot of time near rivers.
email: river_pal@hotmail.com
I'm ok with Jack Kerouac stream-of-conscious, but not Clint Eastwood stream-of-conscious. Any thoughts?
The purpose of writing a review is not to flag issues, but share UX stories.
For example: - a repo could be working as intended, but *might not be a suitable fit for a particular user, stack, or implementation* - a repo could be *losing momentum, core team moved on, orphaned, or have other development meta-issues* that would be helpful sharing - particularly *critical issues are `wontfix` or `not planned`* or on a long-term dev roadmap - multiple repos could be attempting to achieve all or part of the same goal
The *process of comparing repos can be very time-consuming*, and the venue for such a comparison does not lie within one of the reviewed repos (nor their issues, discussions, slack, or discord).
In these cases, it can *save a person hours if not days of work* to read a review.
UX stories can also be written once, and repeated queries funneled to the same point: "sure, take a look at my review here".
Multiplied across multiple teams and orgs this is a *significant increase in community productivity*.
I hope that helps to explain the goal of sharing UX stories in an independent, transparent, and centrally-located repo.
I'd love to get your feedback and anyone who wants to contribute is welcome to. Here's the link: