You are what you do.

I find some things I wanted to do just didn't fit in the way I was doing them.

For example journaling and meditation, two things you mentioned, weren't great for me to be consistent about; I don't get something out of them every time and they don't build up for me. I practice meditation enough that its there when I need it to calm things down but not religiously. Journaling was just about reflection to me, just find some quiet time and think, no need to bring writing into it, and finding that time/looking for it/wanting it, I think helps keep over-stimulation in check.

For weightlifting, why bother? Because I see the consequences in others, it only gets harder the older you get. I liked the idea of "earning" the day by doing something hard to commit to my future and sometimes the hard thing is working out with a migraine or illness, I'm lucky to still be able to.

What do these things mean to you; what do you want out of them.

Very reasonable and I think sums up my feelings on it as well.

I avoid meta like the plague but making some kind of pre-emptive pact to block it in an open ecosystem seems a lot like a gatekeeping bandwagon; they don't even bother to list an actual reason.

It has a "free evaluation" that I think can be as long as you want it to be / honor system.
Its been worth it to me to pick up a license and support the development though. Its reasonably priced (for a dev tool) / no subscription and definitely beats the free clients I was using before (Sourcetree/GithubDesktop).

It might depend on the definition but I'd probably expect engagement/total to play a bigger factor.

As it is it weights very heavily towards evenness:
A: (11, 10) = 21
B: (99, 90) = 21

They have the same ratio of votes but I'd expect B to be more controversial since more votes are tied up in the controversy / it got more attention. Maybe most people just don't care about A so they didn't bother to vote.

I’m sure it’s not going to last forever as this site grows in popularity

To me that's one of the main benefits of having so many instances; even if the traffic gets wild on a couple there will still be smaller instances with different sorts of users.

This post earlier in the day I think had some good information on this subject.

There is a lot of syncing going on across instances so part of it could be due to some comments just not being federated yet or it could be that the one with less is not federating with as many other instances and missing some users that federate to the other.

I'd be curious if "Squirrel" originated with the SQuirreL client. The only time I've heard someone call SQL "squirrel" was because they were using SQL interchangeably with the client.

Presumably those wouldn't be as upvoted so they wouldn't sort with useful content but I do think someone might go on forever posting like that with a 0 score where a -1 might give them a moment of reflection.

It was never going to do more than get people talking, the number of subreddits isn't as important as what the long term impact to users and quality will be. They have signaled their interests are not user centric, it wont be the last outrage I'm sure but they'll keep getting away with it if there isn't a clear alternative and people keep going back.

It also lines up with the media attention span. On day 5 "reddit lost users during the blackout" will be a better headline than "blackout still going on fyi".

I think of AI in programming the same way I think about search engines (there are a lot of parallels). It can be helpful when you're stuck or learning something new, it can be wrong, and if you use it for everything you might get something that works but its not going to look like something someone with experience would have done.