I don’t know. I don’t think the author paints him in a particularly bad light. It mostly seems to be trying to point out why neovim was made, specifically that

I don’t know. I don’t think the author paints him in a particularly bad light. It mostly seems to be trying to point out why neovim was made, specifically that its authors valued different things than the author of vim. I also think the amount of work that’s gone into neovim is way more than enough to call the authors authors at this point. The forking of vim doesn’t seem to me to be “tak[ing] over code based in order to cruise on other people‘a hard work,” but open source working as intended. The neovim authors were able to take a project, adjust it to fit with their values, and let people decide which they prefer.