Abandon Vim and adopt Neovim - hard reasons for not doing so?

Since my alternative multi-question approach does not seem to be gaining support/traction, I must accept the message communicated by that low participation.

Given the high-level nature of the decision to go/no-go with adoption of a replacement tool, i.e. abandon Vim and adopt Neovim, isn't there some benefit to the community to keep all the related material under a single umbrella question (i.e. SPOC approach) so that community members wouldn't need to go searching and cherry-picking from different responses that are unrelated to each other?

To repeat a comment that I posted elsewhere, I must say that to force the discussion of such an overriding issue (aka Risks of Migration) into many narrow, disconnected and disassociated questions is not conducive to having a wholistic view of the issue at hand.

Forcing discussion of various contributing factors, out of context of other factors, prevents a proper fleshing out of the full scope of issues, or making evident the inter-dependencies, one may encounter ... and need to fully weigh before making that final decision.

As a side comment regarding the approach taken by the site in regards to my question,

  • I recognize the need to minimize opinion-based responses, and keeping responses fact-based;
  • with my original question, I tried to achieve that but was told otherwise.

It is my perspective that for any community, there must be, on occasion, instances where the "boundaries" of the community must be relaxed/adapted to encompass a situation which, while it counters the original defined concepts for the community, does nonetheless serve to meet the community's needs by providing benefits that negate the "harm" perceived by allowing the community to involve itself with, or participate in, its continuance/promotion/growth.

It is my earnest belief that my original question falls into that category of special topic deserving of flexibility in treatment and review of the responses provided ... in order to serve the community as a whole.

  • 2
    Hey Eric, yes—this is the kind of typical pattern for SE sites when you disagree about the status of a post and need to bring more attention to it. Votes on this Q should generally indicate support (or not) for opening the question. Thanks for taking the time to follow up, and for having the thick skin required to withstand downvotes (not mine) when things aren't working out :) Your politeness is much appreciated.
    – D. Ben Knoble Mod
    Sep 26, 2022 at 15:08
  • 3
    I do intend to write an answer here summarizing my viewpoint of the situation, but I hope to see answers or more details in your question convincing me (or enough other people) to re-open the question. Ultimately, if the community feels the question should stay open, that decision will probably stand. I also cannot promise a timeline for my answer. I plan to submit it by the end of the week; if you haven't heard from me by then, ping me here or in chat.
    – D. Ben Knoble Mod
    Sep 26, 2022 at 15:10
  • @Ben, should I delete my other questions now? Sep 26, 2022 at 17:09
  • 1
    Best laid plans… my response has been delayed more than I would like. I apologize for that. Unfortunately it will have to wait a little longer while I recover from a cycling injury
    – D. Ben Knoble Mod
    Oct 6, 2022 at 13:45
  • Health comes first. Take whatever time it takes. Oct 6, 2022 at 15:17
  • Well, given that the community has voted to re-open the Q, I think we can let this die :)
    – D. Ben Knoble Mod
    Oct 15, 2022 at 17:20
  • Thank you again, Ben. I know its hard, sometimes, to wear the "enforcer" hat. No reproach from me for having taken your stance. However, I would very much welcome your intended feedback via email to guide future postings. I would prefer not having to go thru this kind of "joyride" again. :-) [email protected] Oct 15, 2022 at 17:28

1 Answer 1


Thank you, Ben. Much appreciated!

I really don't understand what you mean by

I hope to see answers or more details in your question convincing me (or enough other people) to re-open the question.

Not sure what you mean by "answers" in the above.

Or the kinds of "details" that you are referring to.

I completely acknowledge that the question is of an open-ended nature (not what Vi and Vim has as stated norm.

But the nature of Risk Assessment for Decision Making dictates that it needs to be. Risks are risks .. which can never be fully identified or captured, however much we make the attempt!

In similar fashion, a CEO can't be expected to know such risks up front or to be able to formulate/verbalize those risks in narrow-fashion abstractly, even less specifically. They understandably need to rely on experts, those with the in-depth knowledge and hard-earned experience in the domain.

Those experts need to be free to speak clearly, and expansively, at such pivotal moments (crisis of decision), not being deflected ... but encouraged ... to speak!

To come forward!

To inform stakeholders, to the extent that they are willing ... and that they see themselves allowed ... with the fullness of their insights ... in whatever form it may take ... objectively, not subjectively.

Yes ... those contributions might not be short, terse, pinpoint responses.

But if all answers are focused on the objective of itemizing and detailing risks related to the stated action being considered, is such a discussion not worthy of the community's attention and contribution?

Is the community not deserving that its members step forward ... to contribute to such a focused, collective distillation on such a high-impact decision for individuals or organizations, the fruits of which would benefit that self-same community, be it in support of a pending decision or ... in defense of, and then ongoing support of, a decision which meets with continued/ongoing resistance ?

It is true that such an expansively inclusive leniency regarding the responses, beyond stated constraints which are the norm for the community, should not be given lightly ... or frequently ... but some topics inherently warrant such exceptional treatment ... because of their "umbrella" nature for an issue/task at an abstracted higher level (aka decision-making in balancing risks).

I would like to further suggest that such questions would benefit from being assigned some "visible tag" which flags the review/acceptance as such an exception (preferrably before it being closed) so that the special treatment of the question is made obvious to the community and, by doing so, the momentum associated with a given "discussion" is not lost because potential contributors found themselves stepping away because of a CLOSED status. Better yet, that labelling of special status might encourage some, who might not have stepped forward otherwise, to share their wealth of knowledge.

I pray that you will see the merits of this petition and allow the question to reopen and the contributions by community members to snowball and encompass the bounty of the community!

  • 2
    This answer is horribly pedantic. You're not making yourself any favors by expressing your point in this way. Just say that the most voted answer was in the middle of collecting objective differences between vim and neovim when it was abruptly closed, and that some people in the community already talked about how such question can be really useful going forward.
    – r_31415
    Sep 27, 2022 at 20:16
  • I had no intention of being pedantic. As I have always done in my career, I have tried to address an issue from the most generalized and abstract position such that the outcome could be applicable in a generalized fashion to other questions of a similar nature, thereby reducing the discussion time for future reviews of other questions, having established a (hopefully new) generalized stance regarding such questions that might need a more flexible treatment, not just this one put forward by myself, and having been fully fleshed out, would possibly not warrant a future revisit. Sep 27, 2022 at 20:42
  • 1
    Well, don't do that. Abstraction is good in mathematics, not for a Q&A site.
    – r_31415
    Sep 27, 2022 at 20:50
  • I feel like that reply demands an proper retort ... but I will let others do that. Sep 28, 2022 at 19:26

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .