>My take is that they went with all their bizarre design decisions in order to keep normies and entryists out for as long as possible But it's just complexity

>My take is that they went with all their bizarre design decisions in order to keep normies and entryists out for as long as possible But it's just complexity for the sake of complexity with no discernible benefit. It's contradictory and self-defeating to encourage developers to adopt Urbit while simultaneously purposely designing it just so developers won't adopt it. Urbit makes many weird and contrarian design choices without explanation. It's fine to explore ideas and try different different methodologies but you should at least be able to explain why you're choosing to do it and how it would be beneficial. Here's a good example from the documentation: A loobean is a Nock boolean - Nock, for mysterious reasons, uses 0 as true (always say "yes") and 1 as false (always say "no"). So they create an alternative to booleans that's just a backwards boolean? And their explanation for this? 'mysterious reasons' What?!? The only thing mysterious here is why any developer would use this.