I don’t disagree with your points but I think they apply to pretty specific groups. I doubt that the average person knows or cares that Bluesky is a PBC. The reaction of the average person to ‘open source’ is probably, “I have no idea what that is and please for the love of god don’t explain it to me.”

The initial exodus lead to tons of people complaining about lack of features on Lemmy with very few people actually stepping up to contribute to the code-base to bring those features to light.

Dude…I have zero clue how to use linux. Which I assume is easier than writting code. You think I’m going to write a program in C++ or whatever language?

Saying the users aren’t developing the program is like saying the hospital patients aren’t willing to be their own doctor.

Users will ALWAYS bring up issues, and if the developers want the platform to grow, they’ll implement upgrades to fix those issues.

Otherwise, you just have a userbase that rejects your platform, goes somewhere else, and a small group on the platform wondering why it’s not growing.

Which is basically the core of this post.

To be fair, people having ideas for features is a valuable contribution in its own right.

Entitlement to them, not so much. But feature suggestions have value even if many of them aren’t practical and many more never get added.

This is weird on multiple levels, Bluesky code is Open Source, it’s federated and no one gives a damn about it being a PBC. It’s mostly about culture why people have gone to Bluesky and Threads