In recent days, the discussion around Lemmy has become a bit...spicy. There's a few points of impact here. To list some examples: Beehaw being frustrated enough to ponder leaving the software Sublinks being started out of uncertainty with the lemmy roadmap Drama about inability to delete images and lemmy dev reactions to the priority request [...]
Honestly, I think the Beehaw admin might’ve simply nailed it when they talked about vision. There’s nothing inherently wrong with not wanting to be the lead over a project having hundreds of thousands or millions of people involved. That’s not inherently necessary to always grow.
I hate to bring political/economic ideology into this, but I’m reminded of Marxist philosophy. In that ideology, properly realized, there are no huge, massively-scaled organizations that lead top-down. Only smaller independent ones that work cooperatively, nothing much bigger than a city-state. The idea of endlessly-growing scale being beneficial is generally a capitalist value.
The ones making the mistake could be us, if we misunderstood the devs real wishes. We would just be projecting onto them, with our own ambitions and goals. That’s not actually healthy.