I did consider this, and several people have offered to take over, but ultimately I feel that the thing that was most useful about RawGit — it made serving HTML

I did consider this, and several people have offered to take over, but ultimately I feel that the thing that was most useful about RawGit — it made serving HTML at scale dead simple for anyone with a GitHub repo — is also the thing that made it most prone to abuse. It came down to a simple equation: fighting abuse on RawGit will _always_ take more time and effort than spreading abuse via RawGit. One persistent jerk working a few hours a day could do so much damage so quickly that mitigating it would require multiple people working full time. There's just no good way to scale that and retain the functionality that actually made RawGit useful. I talked about this a little more here: https://github.com/rgrove/rawgit/pull/191#issuecomment-428310526 https://github.com/rgrove/rawgit/pull/191#issuecomment-42831...