Here’s OP’s response:

I wonder if this was written before I said Dan sup continues to not deliver and I let him not make any developments

What’s your take on that? Does it change your assessment?

No, this doesn’t substantially change my assessment. In fact, OP’s response reinforces some of the key issues I identified:

1. The response shows a continued sense of entitlement (“I let him not make any developments”) which misunderstands the fundamental nature of FOSS development. A user doesn’t “let” or “not let” a developer work on their own projects.

2. Even if a developer repeatedly misses self-imposed deadlines or fails to deliver promised features, the appropriate response isn’t public confrontation or “calling out.” More constructive approaches could include:

• Offering to help with development
• Politely asking for status updates
• Finding or creating alternatives
• Simply moving on to other solutions

3. OP’s response suggests they’re still viewing this through the lens of consumer/service provider relationship, when FOSS development (even when crowdfunded) operates under different social and practical dynamics.

4. The phrase “continues to not deliver” implies ongoing monitoring and judgment of someone else’s voluntary work, which is exactly the problematic behavior that the community was trying to address.

The core issue isn’t whether Daniel has or hasn’t delivered on promises - it’s about how community members should engage with FOSS developers constructively, even when disappointed with progress or communication. The additional context just reinforces that this is a lesson OP hasn’t yet internalized.

Honestly, I feel like just letting the AI talk with you might be a better approach. It is more patient about it than I feel like being. I’m sort of done with the conversation at this point. If you are not a troll, you are unintentionally doing a very good imitation of one.