I was reluctant to get involved with Gemini initially - it seemed like Gopher had already existed and could benefit from a revival, rather than someone creating

I was reluctant to get involved with Gemini initially - it seemed like Gopher had already existed and could benefit from a revival, rather than someone creating something new (after all, Gopher+ actually offers some good possibilities for doing more modern things, and TLS support is now ubiquitous in gopher even if not officially in the spec) Upon reading some more about Gemini though - especially solderpunk's "ponderings" phlog entries (https://gopher.floodgap.com/gopher/gw?=zaibatsu.circumlunar.space+70+312f7e736f6c64657270756e6b2f70686c6f67 https://gopher.floodgap.com/gopher/gw?=zaibatsu.circumlunar....) that I grew to appreicate where gemini came from - a considered criticism of where gopher has not aged well. Gemini has grown to address some of those short comings and that is actually quite nice, and the main driving force for it came from an active user of gopher already so that seemed nice. What I do find a bit annoying is gemini-the-protocol vs gemini-the-philosophy. E.g. there was a client (I forget the details - sorry) that introduced the concept of a unicode "favicon" and a few people lost their shit about it. Nothing was wrong with the favicon thing - it was totally legit use of the gemini protocol but people were angry about just the concept of a client making requests that they felt did not fit their view of what gemini "means", with various threats about blocking all users/IPs that made requests for a favicon etc. I find this viewpoint from "small internet" proponents fairly sad and annoying. If the protocol allows it, who are they to say what is right or proper and what is not? It makes me want to write a gemini client that supports styling and some sort of "GeminiObjectModel" and javascript support purely out of principle/trolling-lolz :-)