@Gargron I used to use Ghost but long-term, I found the tool limiting because they weren’t developing the things I cared about at the right pace (putting in add-ons, adding my own design functionality) and removing things I liked (raw Markdown writing interface!). Godspeed that they're a lot closer now but they were sort of not in a great spot for a while.
@ernie What? They removed the markdown writing interface? I haven't used it for anything since before 1.0, but that was part of the appeal of it all to me: a simplified blog backend with native markdown support.
@OberstKrueger They added a rich-text interface that supports Markdown writing. It’s basically a much better version of Gutenberg in WordPress—though they originated that idea first
@OberstKrueger That was part of my problem with it. I *wanted* Markdown and wanted them to add shortcodes. They went kind of in the other direction, which was disappointing.
@ernie It's objectively false that we removed Markdown, prevented any design functionality, or that at any point we "weren't in a good spot for a while" — what a bizarre set of nonsense to completely invent
@johnonolan It’s not that you guys removed Markdown but it’s not raw text like it once was—which I think is the experience some of your original users were looking for. The editor does more now, and while that’s a good thing in many senses, it wasn’t the original value proposition.
@johnonolan And to be clear: I used Ghost for 3+ years, pretty heavily mind you, but ended up moving because my needs were moving away from pure blogging. I don’t mean to be critical of the good work you’ve done, but I sort of felt like every time I asked about some of these features, the answer was effectively, "we’re getting there." You run a small staff, and I get that. But that was tough because I wanted to stick by Ghost, but my needs changed too fast.
@johnonolan Again, this was just my experience. Other users may have had things different, but I say this as someone who was a longtime user. I understand that you’re building something complex and that takes time to get right. Some of it may have been my specific use case.
@ernie The new editor literally contains the old editor — 100% of the identical features and functionality are there, and nothing has been removed. Every Markdown card is a full-featured instance of the old editor.
It's 2 keypresses to get access to the old editor if that's what you prefer.
Meanwhile there are also hundreds of integrations and the front-end is more decoupled and flexible than it ever has been for building custom design functionality.
@ernie It's absolutely fine if you don't like it - that's completely up to you - but afraid the claims that we removed raw Markdown support, have not evolved support for addons or custom design/front-ends are simply not true.
@johnonolan But that’s not what I said. I said it was a pacing thing. The integrations feature in particular was only starting to be added as I was moving my content. At that point I was too invested in my CMS move to wait it out, unfortunately. (I also had fairly niche needs pushing my shift—I wanted to build different content templates for the web and email that would render consistently for each format. That change, which involved a lot of regex, saved me a lot of production time.)
@johnonolan I think I may have had different expectations than many folks in terms of design; early on I assumed that a shortcodes-style treatment for modifying the markdown code would eventually appear; and that eventually came in the form of cards—which is a great solution, by the way, even if it wasn’t what I thought might appear. A big part of that expectation is on me, honestly.
@johnonolan Either way, I feel bad because I think my comments were misconstrued—and probably came off as harsher than I meant them. Your team has made a lot of progress, and my own limitations are in large part because of shifts on my end that worked for me. But in the last year Ghost has grown in a lot of ways and has evolved quite fast.
As far as my comments about the editor, I fully admit that’s a personal preference. Either way, I’m sorry if my comments hit the wrong way.
@Gargron Interesting... don't think this competes with Patreon, really... On a feature parity level, Patreon's main competition is Ko-Fi, IMO.
Ghost seems to really be competing with WordPress and Medium, both of which have publication subscription models either built-in or by extension (plugin).
@Gargron Oh wow! This is super interesting. I had no idea this project existed. Definitely something I will do some reading on. Thanks for sharing the info and link 👍
@Gargron From their TOS.
You will not transmit, distribute, post, store, link, or otherwise traffic in Content, information, software, or materials on or through the Service that (i) is unlawful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, libelous, deceptive, fraudulent, invasive of another's privacy, tortious, offensive, profane, contains or depicts pornography that is unlawful, or is otherwise inappropriate as determined by us in our sole discretion
@Gargron oooh, gotta check this out! I set up a Ghost blog a couple of months ago so its nice getting such a big upgrade already :D
@gargron you mean hosted by Ghost, or actually self-hosted by content creators? They don't seem really keen to change their model based on pushing their Pro hosted offering above anything else.
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!