I meant the original content creator which is the developer, while the video maker/uploader (i.e. derived content creator) is the letsplayer.

Gameplay videos can be entertaining for their plot, dialogues and visuals even if the player says nothing and plays poorly. On the other hand, a good "letsplayer" can make it much more entertaining to watch and ultimately attract some buyers. They should realize that such a symbiosis is good for both of them. The developers should stop removing or taking all the ad revenue while letsplayers should share it with the developer.
Would be nice to see if Youtube allowed to share revenues between the content creators and the video makers/uploaders.

They do not do it for free. They collect information about my interests in news and articles to pick the ads I'll most likely click. This is a fair tradeoff, not charity.

Although I seldom use their search engine directly since they focus more on searches in Russian, I can confirm that it works very well. They also have, among other things, better maintained and more detailed maps of ex-soviet countres with better traffic jam and accident tracking, an EXTREMELY convenient product search that lets you specify an insane amount of properties and features to pick the most fitting item that exists on the market and then find a good rated and cheap place to buy it, a great multilingual online dictionary and a convenient online storage service which has existed far longer than Google Drive. Their web pages have a simple, consistent and concise design, their ads are few and non-intrusive, and, on top of all this, the company has an almost cult standing among many tech students for its high wages and free CS and data mining school where they teach interested people in-depth data mining, artificial intelligence, algorithms and many other related and not-so-much things.

Why do I mention all this? First, to confirm that they are popular for a very good reason and, second, because most of their services use Internet data mining techniques to gather results, so if you live in CIS, chances are you are hooked anyway and you generate many internet searches indirectly even if you don't use their search feature. Unless Google pays as much attention to foreign countries as it does to the U.S. and keeps expanding its services, it should not be surprising to see sound local competition in some countries.

I dug more deeply into your posts and see now that you planned your wiki as a temporal experiment from the very beginning (and quite explicitly said so). It's great that you intend to preserve the user-created data as well, so nothing of value will be lost. Still, I think your project would have grown much more popular in a few years if you didn't give up and gave some sort of a pledge that it won't be shut down in a year or two. Anyway, thank you for your attempt in improving this valuable source of information.

Shutting down in less than a year because the project got too little attention is foolish as it takes years for most users to discover you. I had no idea it existed, if I knew, I would have tried it as I do believe that EmacsWiki has a fair amount of problems. Shutting down and dragging down all content and time that users were willing to contribute is just ridiculously irresponsible. EmacsWiki may not be perfect, but it has been around for years and I am fairly confident that the owner will not decide to shut it down tomorrow or next year on a whim like this guy.

Misleading title is misleading.

s/more error-prone/less error-prone

If your coworker is actually really smart and experienced, maybe he has a good reason to do things his way and you're just not seeing it? Maybe he could explain that reason behind his naming convention and avoiding certain features and it would make more sense? I had a couple of interesting talks on similar topics with older programmers in our team (I'm a newbie) where they actually convinced me on most points why their style and policy to avoid certiain "fancy" language features and practices was more error-prone and readable after a while of working on the project.

Let us now hope that no ponzi scheme was involved and they've got enough funds to make and ship normal consoles as well by the schedule.

Apart from getting rid of obsolete code, you also get rid of an additional target architecture that could potentially reveal certain bugs and implicit assumptions in the platform-independent part of the kernel that do not fire up on other architectures. That said, I have virtually no experience with the kernel and I have no idea whether this argument makes any bit of sense with the code in question.

Yet she still does not understand the difference?

I have no idea what you are talking about. If you liked an artist's performance, you can google their site where you can find out where to buy their music (or donate) and subscribe to all the latest news (RSS, email). This is all I was saying. The radio played your song and gave your name, this is all that is needed to the listener to reach you. You can ask the radio station to provide a direct link to your site, but this is as far as common sense goes in terms of shoving your name into listeners' throats.

Valid argument. However, there is absolutely no need for forcing radio station to do this. People will write you mails asking if you will be performing in their town. You can create a form for people interested in your performance on your site asking them to provide their location. You can gather information from your official forum if you set one. If you are too much of a stalker, you can track visitors' IPs on your site and see places where you are popular the most. Heck, there are lots of ways of collecting this data, and none of them involves stalking people who don't care about you and your music and just happened to listen to the radio when your song was playing.

They can look you up if they like your performance on the radio. If they like it, they can look you up and probably subscribe to your RSS feed with all your new updates. If they are not doing so, they don't like you and your songs. Duh.

Perhaps their popularity and content quality are the main reason of their crisis, not the business model?