Did Bram Moolenaar tell you that? Otherwise, none of us know what motivated him.

Neovim fans seem to hijack Vim discussions frequently. Sometimes people want to talk about Vim.

I don't think this is a subjective matter? The sequence of events was:

1. async feature was proposed in 2014 and earlier, Bram was opposed to the idea in general

2. neovim was created to integrate async and other improvements

3. lots of plugins started supporting neovim's async

4. vim comes out with its own async feature

You're welcome to ask Bram what motivates him personally, but I'm comfortable with my judgement of causality to the ecosystem as a whole.

> Neovim fans seem to hijack Vim discussions frequently. Sometimes people want to talk about Vim.

You may talk about vim, that's fine. Do you feel neovim is off-topic for vim discussions? It seems fairly related to me.

Not accepting a patch without question doesn't mean he was opposed to the idea.

[0]http://geoff.greer.fm/2015/01/15/why-neovim-is-better-than-v...

Then the developer threw a hissy fit a few days later and created a fork because his patch wasn't accepted right away.

According to the Geoff Greer, they didn't fork Vim. The fork happened a couple of months after their patch wasn't accepted, and they joined: "A couple of months after my disillusionment with Vim, Thiago de Arruda submitted a similar patch. It was likewise rejected. But unlike me, Thiago didn’t give up. He started NeoVim and created a Bountysource for it." http://geoff.greer.fm/2015/01/15/why-neovim-is-better-than-v...

1. async feature proposed and implemented in neovim

2. vim comes out with its own async feature.

shazow's post has significantly more evidence of neovim's responsibility, enough that it isn't a fallacious argument. It isn't definitive proof, either.