The measure of success of a platform can’t be “everything to everyone.” Some of us don’t like what other people like, don’t share the same perspective on something, etc. for reasons of taste, not moral right.

In the fediverse, we can’t accommodate incompatible preferences–however reasonable–without somebody losing out. Of importance is seeking mutual understanding of the question: Is Mastodon a private club where folks can have it their way, or is it a place of public accommodation where some individual protections must give way for accessibility for the masses? If you look through that lens, you can see how folks have widely divergent ideas of what’s reasonable, because what they view Mastodon to be (or what it should be) is also divergent.

Changes to make Mastodon more welcoming might come at the expense of others feeling like it’s safe. Protecting yourself can also be exclusionary, and it may seem unfairly discriminatory. Some folks may be very used to arriving to a location where the existing residents aren’t welcoming for various reasons (some not very honorable), but through effort and persistence, they can carve out a place for themselves. If you change the nature of a space to something else, is that the place you even tried to join?