I think the guile mailing list has come to suffer seriously from a policing of what is appropriate for discussion. When I first started getting into guile at the beginning of 2021, the list was more open, active and enjoyable. Since then it has become a ghost town where tumbleweeds blow by in the time that remains between intermittent duals. But strangely there are still lots of people living in the town (ie guile users), they just seldom visit main street these days.

I'm personally interested to hear about what Stefan and other Guilers are up to beyond Guile, insofar as nobody is directing hate or bigotry. But more importantly, I wish that Guile could again become a space that welcomes discourse insofar as that discourse isn't perceived by some as causing harm or stirring irrelevant controversy.

On Jul 5, 2023, 17:22, at 17:22, Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> wrote:
>Op 02-07-2023 om 16:43 schreef Stefan Israelsson Tampe:
>> It's part of the blog, computers tab, I see guile scheme as an art
>and
>> have a few suggestions of great improvements for it. But you have to
>> demand those features if you like it.
>
>The article and blog post you sent does not contain anything about
>Guile
>Scheme -- there are blog posts that do contain stuff about Guile, but
>this wasn't one of them.
>
>> And if you do not see we have some
>> serious issues in the world, just ignore it as much as you like.
>Enjoy
>> your sleep...
>
>This is non-sequitur, because of the following reasons:
>
>   1. Seeing or not seeing serious issues in the world does not have
>    anything to do with the decision to ignore or not ignore the paper,
>      because it is a physics paper, not a serious issues paper.
>
>   2. I never said I ignored it -- in fact, I skimmed it to see if it
>      contains anything about Guile or serious issues in the world, and
>      it turned out that the article only contains physics, which while
>      interesting, is not something I'm _personally_ interested in.
>
>   3. I also did not ignore the top part of the e-mail
>      (‘... The basis idea [...] and want us all to start doing
>      something. Please copy to anyone that you think should read
>      this.’).  It is one of the reasons I sent my question on why
>      should guile-devel@gnu.org read this article unrelated to Guile.
>
>   4. I asked why guile-devel@gnu.org is in the To, not whether it
>      should be read or ignored.
>
>More to the point, my issue with this is that apparently it is
>completely off-topic for Guile, because it is not about Guile at all,
>and in particular not about Guile development.  There exist many fora
>on
>which you could talk about such things (*), without resorting to chain
>mails.
>
>(*) To list an example:
><https://forums.sufficientvelocity.com/threads/welcome-to-science-technology.41297/>.
>
>Best regards,
>Maxime Devos