There were actually reports of people not being able to use the GIMP in some organisations, there was even a fork that tried to rename but he is not actively developed.
If there is an old game you really love, i think you might be able to increase the chances of it getting preserved by asking the developer to open source the engine, he can still sell it and get the work done for porting it to modern platforms for free.
Porting a closed source game seems a lot more resource intensive so less of those will be done.
But letting user set tags might be useless as they might not use the same tags when talking about the same topic
It seem to work fine for tildes.net, We can allow unrestricted tagging and if real world experience shows it's a problem that bothers some we can add optional tag restricting.
This software is not developed in the open, so only its developers know how it works. It may be insecure in ways that are hard to detect, and it may change without oversight.
tbh assuming automatically open source software is more secure is false, At least one link which mentioned studies said that open source probably does not always "outperform" closed source software in term of security.
The relative security of open source software has been examined repeatedly by researchers since the early 2000s. Open source software contains no more flaws on average than proprietary software. In some cases, it may have fewer vulnerabilities.
Some might argue that having a paid team means better security, So i don't know if the warning about security is really justified, and it might give people a bad impression about flathub (that it is being dogmatic), at least link to some page providing a more detailed explanation would be better (and might prevent new FOSS users from getting a false sense of security).
As it stands, I do not see a way to fix this situation without a hot and active ranking system that takes into account the number of users active in the particular community
lemmy equivalent of multireddits (which is the issue on github with the most "thumbs up") could be useful here, i have multireddits that contain low frequency posting but i still use the front page for "regular stuff".
I don't think subscriber count is a useful metric, look here, subscriber count keeps growing but number of comments made decreased by a lot (apparently reddit was hit hard from the API changes).
I don't know what you can do with that kind of data, but maybe doing the same thing for active users is better.
Not everybody can code, so donors giving their hard earned cash also deserve credit, some projects (for example godot ) can hire multiple full time people due to it, and that can include jobs that don't get a lot of open source contributors like UX people.
That’s not really possible because there’s no way to know which instance to direct someone to. No point directing them to an instance where they don’t have an account.
At least they will know it is on lemmy , then they can figure out how to use it. And that's a general problem of the fediverse, there are extensions that redirect you to your home instance for that.
Also I don’t think showing buttons like upvote which just redirect to another page is a good UX at all.
I think it is at least better then the current state, where you have a tiny button that testing with heat maps will probably show is almost invisible, maybe adding text "go to lemmy to participate in the discussion" is also a decent option.
The ranking is determined by the number of links to a website, so the links will have to be edited so it will all link to the "big website". also changing the link so it will be under your "home instance" might also cause problems (instead of X links you will have X/Y links where Y is the number of home instances).
That's another reason to have some browser extension which will always redirect people to their home instance instead of putting the home instance in the link.
IANAL but don't think they can opted out of it , it's part of the license
Effective on the Change Date, or the fourth anniversary of the first publicly available distribution of a specific version of the Licensed Work under this License, whichever comes first, the Licensor hereby grants you rights under the terms of the Change License, and the rights granted in the paragraph above terminate.
People might not like this change, but if it helps them makes money that gets put back into the project maybe that is a good thing (for those who does not know, it converts to a open source license after four years), maybe that is better then a open core model.
There were actually reports of people not being able to use the GIMP in some organisations, there was even a fork that tried to rename but he is not actively developed.