Why bother? Arathorn and his fanboys will come out of the woodwork to shit on the author of any such piece as soon as it's posted. Just Google Matrix and priva

Why bother? Arathorn and his fanboys will come out of the woodwork to shit on the author of any such piece as soon as it's posted. Just Google Matrix and privacy and there are all sorts of things that come up. The matrix.to links, the default identity server that was eventually removed after Arathorn personally gaslit me on this website about its existence (why did the bad default to use matrix.org as an identity server need to be removed if it wasn't a problem, hmm?) I mean the real question is: do you want to use a distributed database for chat? If you love waiting forty minutes to join a channel on another server, Matrix is for you! I currently use a Matrix server with two other people and I love telling them "I'm going to join a channel on the matrix.org flagship server, so nobody will be able to send messages for an hour or so." Meanwhile I'm using a different chat product on the same server and it works fine while Synapse plugs away at.. uh.. joining a public channel. I've gotten off topic. Point is, Matrix is terrible, but thanks to the sunk cost fallacy people are still pushing it. Stuff like the OP prove to me that the basic failures I've seen in UX with Matrix stem back to a spec that is too large and makes it possible to do too many things that aren't chat, to the detriment of the chat features. Hell, I once witnessed an hours long shouting match in the Synapse Admins channel on the matrix.org homeserver about whether or not Matrix was a chat protocol or not, because it does so much more -- and this argument was between very involved community members/contributors! Maybe, just maybe, we'd be better off using a protocol for chat that knows what kind of protocol it is?