I edited that statement since it was unnecessarily aggressive. In any case, I can see their point. They never claimed to create a federated service and they can

I edited that statement since it was unnecessarily aggressive. In any case, I can see their point. They never claimed to create a federated service and they cannot reasonably be expected to support/vouch for every arbitrary fork on their network. i.e., Vouching to the other party about the security of the communications, which is their main point. >Well, are they in the business of building something open, or building yet another walled garden? They are in the business of accessible secure communications for everyone. I think that's a reasonable goal with their reasonable tradeoffs. It's a free service with no money, no ads, and no obligations. Respecting their network usage policy is really just common courtesy.