> If you really think it's just a config file and nothing more, then just ignore it and move on. It doesn't hurt you with it's existence. I think you're missun

> If you really think it's just a config file and nothing more, then just ignore it and move on. It doesn't hurt you with it's existence. I think you're missunderstanding the reasoning behind the backlash. People are understandably angry at this, because they are afraid of this becoming the norm. Unlike places like the browser, the terminal is a tool that is used strictly for work reasons for most people. Not only that, but for CI logs, it's essential for day to day work. It only takes one brave soul to try something, see if people put up with it, to become the norm. Also, I'm really not sure of why you are calling it "config file" in quotations if we're downplaying his work, because that's literally all it really is. A thin wrapper around ESLint doesn't really count for much. And as FED, I'm not really necessary what all this "cost of running" you speak about is. I'm sure Feross has put a lot of time and effort into his config file, but what about the developers behind ESLint? The actual tool Standard.js runs on? How much % of the funding earnings by Standard is passed to the ESLint team? Plus, it's not like the community doesn't exactly have a bone to pick with an already controversial library already well known for deceiving beginners. Even people like Dan Abramov (Redux's creator) called out it's unfair to call this library "Standard" when it enforces coding practices well known to have many gotchas for beginners and that are far from the norm. But of course, the creator couldn't care less about this, as he is well aware that calling it "Standard" brings lots of traffic to his library.