From 90634b117ab585af0eed8684dd7a5f08614cf2ad Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Lucas <169063936+mustbeperfect@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 12:32:52 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Removed website question in FAQ

---
 source/components/footer.md | 8 --------
 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/source/components/footer.md b/source/components/footer.md
index 129e1c5..bb1a389 100644
--- a/source/components/footer.md
+++ b/source/components/footer.md
@@ -25,14 +25,6 @@ Projects that were once on this list but removed - usually due to abandonement o
 </details>
 
 ## FAQ
-<details>
-  <summary><b>How about a definitive-opensource website?</b></summary> <br />
-A website is definitely on the roadmap. It would provide much requested features like tag based filtering and, on the backend, automate much of what we currently have to do manually. However, for the foreseeable future, the list will remain as a markdown file for one reason: to keep things simple. The current system lets me focus solely on the projects within. The complexities of web development seem unnecessary and an added pain for a task that can suffice, for now, as a markdown file.
-<p>&nbsp;</p>
-The current system could also be considered a stepping stone to guage the community's needs prior to building a website, which would inherently be far more complex. 
-</details>
-
-<details>
   <summary><b>Stars aren't a good metric to guage popularity/quality.</b></summary> <br />
 The minimum star count of 1k has been a major point of contention. Admittedly, star counts don't always reflect project popularity and quality. Stars are biased towards developers because they are the ones with a GitHub account, thus leaving out the input of the end users. But no solution is going to be a one size fits all solution. It's critically important that as the list scales it doesn't devolve into a clutter trap, even if the price is some projects getting left out.
 <p>&nbsp;</p>