I get the idea behind Gutenberg. I also fully understand that it's not aimed at me. I'm the kind of guy who knows HTML, and writes out my things in plain text before adding markup to them. That's me. I like plain text. I'm good at it.

So, as long as I have a way for me to do things for me (and I always will), then I'm fine with the change in focus. Users vary. And lots of users like pagebuilders. But, IMO, most existing pagebuilders suck, because they're overly complex. So, a halfway solution, something that gives people what they're looking for, but brings them closer to the fold, that teaches them the way of the code. Hell, I'm fine with that.

I have not used Gutenberg. I also probably never will, not in a real situation. So, I don't judge it on my own personal terms. I judge it entirely based on how many people who use it and possibly need it will like it better. And on how much it helps bring people closer to making good and better content than they could before. It's not about me. It's about how it helps others. I know what I'm doing already, my needs are covered just fine.

We are trying to democratize publishing, right? That means bringing help even those people who want to publish things in "blocks" of content. Who want to understand the "web" in chunks of things rather than understand code. Yes, sorry, we have to hide the CSS, and the HTML, and the markup, and the markdown. These are easy to learn, but if you're a lawyer, or a writer, then you don't care about them. You care about adding things and laying them out for others properly. We need to work towards that. This is slow enough to work without being a crazy pagebuilder monstrosity. I'm okay with that. One step at a time.