Because it's relevant. Should I never share it because you've already seen it? What about those who haven't? I haven't seen Kagi properly address these issues. So I asked about newer developments I might've missed. No one volunteered any yet.

Someone is personally hurt by the CEO and is now in a crusade to spread bad karma about them.

The author clearly explains how they arrived at their stance, and it wasn't just "hurt feelings." I'm not claiming this was what you intended, but it feels like you're trying to dramatize the criticism and downplay the issues rather than address them.

I also don't see the crusade thing. They wrote down their thoughts, then others found and shared them. They're not the ones posting in ycombinator, or here. It's people like me, unaffiliated with them. We just think more people should know.

You finished saying you liked Kagi and think it's good. There's nothing wrong with that, but I don't see how it helps here, either. I used Kagi for a short while and liked having more control over results, but... the issues remain. It's beside the point.

[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The long and short of it is, Vlad wanted to get me on a call to discuss what he felt were "misunderstandings" in my post. I declined. He pressed a bit with more argument, I explicitly spelled out that I did not want to hear from him again. His response to "stop emailing me" was to write me a big essay arguing with my post (kind of, I'll discuss this more). I sent one more reply reiterating for him to stop emailing me, and that was it.

This to me more sounds like I have made up my mind to not like this guy or his product and nothing will change this. This is personal and even most of the issues being discussed are nit pickings at details and fights on being right or wrong on things that really don't matter

[–] mke@programming.dev 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This to me more sounds like I have made up my mind to not like this guy or his product and nothing will change this.

That's a really unfair reading of the situation. People aren't obligated to listen to us and change their minds. As long as they're willing, sure, do your best, but no means no. Vlad seemingly doesn't understand no. That's not good, and added to their previous insights, I can understand why the author wouldn't want to enter a call with a such a person.

most of the issues being discussed are nit pickings at details and fights on being right or wrong on things that really don't matter

It might help if you elaborate, but right now I can't agree. For example, Vlad's views on privacy and biases are kind of wild (no suicide hotlines numbers because they're biased but also put LLMs everywhere) and that matters if you're going to use his product to search information online (and possibly his e-mail service as well).