I'm happy you did something different, even though your reasons are of course all wrong. I do wish it had been Node and not Ruby - JavaScript fits most of your reasons for going with an open source stack a lot better than Ruby does. But back to why you're wrong on the internet: 1. .NET licensing isn't complicated, SQL Server is. There's an easy fix for that. 2. I don't think StackOverflow really participates in the best that the .NET open source world has to offer. From the information I can read, you (and team) published a lot of the code you wrote under open source licenses, but as far as I know the StackOverflow stack didn't really interact with many (any?) open source .NET projects that weren't run by StackOverflow - e.g. writing MiniProfiler instead of working with Glimpse, working with Mono, etc. 3. There's a lot that's changed in the .NET web space in the past year as they've moved from just releasing the code (see 2 above) to accepting pull requests. This has resulted in a good amount of accepted pull requests - community contributed features which ship "in the box" and are officially supported by Microsoft. Sometimes that's lines of code, but more often it's integration of popular community libraries. If anything, that trend is accelerating. Coding Horror Fan, Jon

Concur. Pagination hasn't made sense since Ajax became mainstream and sane people realized that "the page fold" doesn't exist. This is also a testament to the fact that... [cont'd] <-Prev [Comment page 1 of 35] Next->