I suppose that I come at this from a "scratching your own itch" perspective.

Someone writing something which does what *they* want it to do.

If there's a plan to write something to appeal to others then, sure, it would make sense to take into accounts the requirements and wishes of others... it is hard to argue that people are not using the service if it does not work for them.

Similarly, one cannot please all the people, all the time, *especially* perhaps if there are more unfunded feature requests than people available to implement them.

@neil I am with this up to the point when advocates for these alternative services (as is depressingly common) start getting upset more people don't use them, or blaming users for not doing so.

It's one thing to not want to respond to random demands as a volunteer, it's another entirely to not listen to user feedback and then get upset that people prefer something that works better for their purposes. (See the frequent discussions on here about how people sacrifice privacy for "convenience" on here - yes, people don't want to be inconvenienced! That is not their problem, it's the software developers'!)