Everyone has their own frame of reference and their own opinion on what is right or wrong in a particular situation. There could also be a singular objective hierarchy of morality or righteousness - but each person is going to have to come to their own conclusion about if that exists or not.
I think the philosophy of engagement they outline there is internally consistent, but I don't think it supports where they go next:
> If you think Cognitect is not doing anything for the community, or is not listening to the community, you are simply wrong.
It's consistent to say that you do things for your own reasons and other people are not entitled to any engagement w/r/t their opinions on your work - but then also you are not entitled to anyone else agreeing to your opinions either. You can have all the opinions you want about your own work - but you're not entitled to anyone agreeing with them. The idea that doing the work should mean something for you is, after all, just another opinion.
Alternatively, you could proceed from an ethic of building a shared understanding of creative community. Then you get to say things like "you are wrong if you don't think we are helping" - because you have a definition of community that you're following and the work you are doing is structured to support that definition. But then complaints do have value and standing, because you're promoting a kind of social contract. Not all complaints have standing ofc - but certainly some will!
I think the philosophy of engagement they outline there is internally consistent, but I don't think it supports where they go next:
> If you think Cognitect is not doing anything for the community, or is not listening to the community, you are simply wrong.
It's consistent to say that you do things for your own reasons and other people are not entitled to any engagement w/r/t their opinions on your work - but then also you are not entitled to anyone else agreeing to your opinions either. You can have all the opinions you want about your own work - but you're not entitled to anyone agreeing with them. The idea that doing the work should mean something for you is, after all, just another opinion.
Alternatively, you could proceed from an ethic of building a shared understanding of creative community. Then you get to say things like "you are wrong if you don't think we are helping" - because you have a definition of community that you're following and the work you are doing is structured to support that definition. But then complaints do have value and standing, because you're promoting a kind of social contract. Not all complaints have standing ofc - but certainly some will!