He was truly cringeworthy in the way he handled me. So first, I come up to the Eich-Gab thing like, "You guys can argue all day about centralization vs. decentralization, BAT, and whatnot, but you guys are gonna be working together for a long time whether or not you like it, so I'd suggest trying to find common ground and trying to figure out a way to get along without attacking each other for little things." Then Eich comes back with, "Criticism !=attack (both directions). Downstream side of a fork is subordinate and there's no obiligation to work together." Then I'm like, "Okay then. At the very least, I suggest that you stop getting salty about Gab forking your browser because Brave is a fork of Chromium and the code for it is open source and available under a Mozilla Public License 2.0 that allows for modification and commercial use." Eich comes back with, "Don't lecture me on open source. I've been doing it for 25 years. Downstream fork has to carry cost or work in earnest to upstream. That’s not salt just the nature of the relation. The only salt in sight was from bitcoin maximalist tears." Which leads me to remind him, "Note that this started with you getting salty by saying and I quote "No, I doubted you were irrational enough to take on a fork of a fork. Good luck, and note "build" is not the same as "fork"." So, don't act like you're not guilty of salt either in this situation." Eich comes back with, "That was not “salt”. I think forking a browser to get an extension distributed is irrational, and I said so." So then I thought, maybe he wanted to get some message across but did so the wrong way. So I responded, "Then why didn't just say, "I'm not a big fan of forking browsers simply to get extensions distributed. However, I wish you luck in your journey of developing your browser." initially? That would've gone over so much better and you guys wouldn't have gotten into the mess that you guys are in right now." Eich comes back with, "What are you talking about? We're in no mess." And of course, he cites the moments where he defended Dissenter from the ban. I'm like, "I get it. But you came across as if you were a bit salty though in this thread. Again, see that first reply you made when Gab posted they successfully forked Brave. Had you responded in a way like I suggested above, then this talk between us wouldn’t be existing right now." Leading us to the very moment where he was like, "I noticed your tweets often overflow by just a few words - try to fit in 280 exactly." At which point, I'm like, "Ok. Jesus, chill. People's thoughts do extend over 280 characters and that's totally okay." Then he's like, "Oh I was just playing. You seem very bossy and context-blind and I thought you might want the same back." So I'm like, "Well, it didn't seem that way. Oddly, you come across in a very arrogant and confrontational manner." Then he's like, "What didn't seem that way? You were telling me about open source, including a license I was involved in from inception. You were telling me how to tweet. Heal thyself!" I clarify, "Didn’t seem like you were playing around when you tweeted the whole “try to do 280 characters exactly” thing." Eich says, "It was me telling you how to tweet, after you did that about four times. Get it?" So then I proceed to say, "Also, just because you have years and years of experience doesn’t mean you can be a smug asshole when people call you out on your bullshit and try to remind you of what you created so that you don’t suddenly ruin it for your own gain." At which point he states that's he going to mute me because I don't make sense. I'm like, "Wow... very mature of you to chicken out like this. *rolls eyes*" TL;DR Brendan Eich is a fucking insuffrable cunt, like you said, and it was cringeworthy to see how he handled my criticisms of him.