Those are good points. Your first point regarding differentiating between volunteers who manage content and skilled experts maintaining expert expresses my sen

Those are good points. Your first point regarding differentiating between volunteers who manage content and skilled experts maintaining expert expresses my sentiment as well. I've been a board member of several non profits and my (anecdotal) experience is that finding a small team of hackers who would do the work pro bono is a hard challenge. Your comment on the 'snackable entertainment' is a take on the increased competition and pressure between hobbies and activities. In a world with so many fast changing options and rapidly changing expectations, it's hard to keep people's attention for a prolonged time. So, more often then not, if an organisation or a community doesn't have the resources, access to expertise or the time to focus on setting up infrastructure, things rather quickly get relegated to centralised platforms because of their non-existent entry bar. Your last comment is also on point: outsourcing and leveraging existing infrastructure at marginal costs is an engrained strategy in younger generations: don't waste time building technology, if you could readily use tools that are available to you. Maybe the big differentiator that makes captivating communities a success or a bust is just plain old day-to-day governance. Rather then pushing a particular business model that's often at odds with the interests of the communities present on a platform.