[agmater]

I take issue with a lot of this advice, actually.

- The name of the site is not a necessity, the url makes it clear. Weird recommendation if you aim for a "pure reading experience".

- Having a comment section doesn't detract from the reading at all. It's after reading your content, and can then enhance the discussion. Fine if you want to leave it out, but encouraging discussion on Twitter instead isn't 'minimal'.

- Minimal images isn't something to strive for, visuals can greatly enhance your content.

- Short urls look nice, but just `w` as your slug is just confusing. No harm in normal length urls.

- Medium.com is used as an example, that site is 80% popups. Paul Graham's site is also awful to use (especially on mobile). Great content, hidden behind bad websites.

- Why would related posts, or even tags, be bad? Navigation doesn't have to distract, and is a tool for the user.

The author makes some fair points, nobody likes the bloat of the modern web. But you don't have to go "full minimalist" either, your website would be greatly improved if you change the #ffffff background with #000 text. It's the same with motherfuckingwebsite.com vs bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com; small changes can greatly increase the appeal, which will help your content get seen and spread. Like others mentioned, prioritizing a good user experience is probably what you want, not striving for minimalism.