You're talking about a library of markdown files for your own personal use to practice writing some code, posted to github, and includes a bunch of language about how to contribute, explicit instructions to fork it, etc.

Imagine giving a flying shit about the lack of a license, in that context. Couldn't be me.

The lack of a license file is by several orders of magnitude the least interesting thing about this repo.

> Imagine giving a flying shit about the lack of a license, in that context. Couldn't be me.

Some of us are accountable to other people for these kinds of things. One comment mentioned possibly using this for a team transitioning to Go. In that context, license can matter. Having explicit authorization to use it changes it from an open question that can raise concerns, to something you don't have to worry about.

Btw well done on adding to the "perennial complaining about the license". The top comment made a perfectly reasonable request, that may have been useful to the OP author. It wasn't a complaint. You could have just not commented. And flagging was an obnoxious choice.

>Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting.

Complaining about the license falls under this. Someone asked my it was flagged, I answered. One flag isn't enough to kill a comment, btw. I was far from the only one who flagged.

>Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.

Complaining about why I flagged is discouraged.

Do better.