Thread by @SethAbramson

You misread me, my intentions, how I see myself, and what I was trying to achieve.

My aim was to help and not hurt.

You should feel good about having ended this attempt by a journalist to draw attention to #nesdev.

I’ve removed the article and will end the project immediately.

https://twitter.com/SoleGoose/status/1479151351422722055

(PS) The methodology article preceding the rankings—which everyone skipped—made clear that I'm not perfect and that mistakes would be made and that I would try to continually improve the work. I made countless edits in response to suggestions.

All of that good faith was ignored.

(PS2) I really hope the NES homebrew scene thrives. That the first time a journalist with a large audience tried to take an expansive view of it—with an explicit statement that all rankings are *subjective*—he was met with claims that it was “dangerous.” That does not auger well.

(PS3) I spent months, scores of hours and hundreds of dollars to write a free article intended to celebrate the work of artists I respect. I emphasized that I welcomed critique and would keep trying to make my work better. All I got were attacks. I’m sorry, but life is too short.

(PS4) I don’t know when a journalist with a large audience will again try to create an ongoing project of this size/scope that offers free publicity for the NES homebrew community. I hope it’s soon. Maybe it’ll be years. I don’t know. I do hope you treat that next effort better.

(PS5) I want to thank @SoleGoose for making clear to me that no matter how much I called my work subjective, no matter how much I made my intentions clear in an essay no one read, no matter how hard I worked, no matter how many edits I made, I would always be deemed “dangerous.”

(PS6) Work done for free and given for free and a labor of love is often treated with contempt. Anyone who doesn’t like their position in a ranking will try to destroy it. I’m just too old to play this game with you all. I earnestly wish the community only the best in the future.

(NOTE) At the time the project was abandoned, the “How to Play These Games” section had been rewritten, typos fixed, new developers added to the developer list, the eligibility rules loosened to celebrate more games, and *many* proposals for the rankings’ second edition accepted.

(NOTE2) The NES homebrew scene is incredible—the art it produces is incredible. But it was explained to me that even though we usually want a journalist to be looking at something from the outside, the community will only accept analysis from the inside. I wish it luck with that.

(NOTE3) @SoleGoose misrepresented the methodology for the rankings, which required only a digital *demo* (so gamers won’t be required to buy a cartridge—the costs of which can be quite high—without a sense of what they’re buying). It was just a *consumer protection* requirement.

(NOTE4) At the time I created the rankings, I’d spent so many months researching the #nesdev community that I had hard data indicating some of its beliefs: only *4%* of devs preclude any digital play (demo or otherwise). @SoleGoose implied that his fringe view was the common one.

(NOTE5) I was so concerned about not honoring games that deserved it I created a special honorable mention section just for those 4%. @SoleGoose ignored it, saying I didn’t know which games devs consider good—then produced his own Top 50 that was almost entirely games on my list.

(NOTE6) I mention all this again in an effort to be helpful. At some point another journalist will try to write something expansive on #nesdev. The same folks will attack and misrepresent it. The community will have to decide how it responds. I hope this situation offers a guide.