Agreed. Honestly, wasn't the whole purpose of open source to be kinda free for all ( the followers, the inventors, the grinders... you name it ). Why does everything I read lately start with a 'should'. I am making a mental note to self.
The problem is that we all vastly differ on what constitutes a positive change. I can practically guarantee you that you are somewhat unlikely to see changes I would suggest as 'positive'. On the other hand, it is not unlikely I would see yours as positive either.
That is why, for all its flaws ( and current set of issues ), current attempt at self-organization is simply better in the long run even if it is a little messy.
no, it probably wouldn't. if people are doing it for fun, they don't want to sit in meetings with strong personalities telling them how to do it. they enjoy coding, they enjoy thinking through interesting things, they don't enjoy taking orders and doing things a certain unfulfilling way just because somebody else prefers it that way. usually you have to pay them for putting up with that kind of thing.
I've been writing an open source DAW for 25 or more years. Every time I see somebody else working on their own new open source DAW or DAW-adjacent project, I find myself wondering whether it would be a better or worse thing if they put their efforts into our already-existing project.
