[fragmede]

> Signal is not social media.

I mean, it is now since they just added a stories feature. Sorry that your view of the product doesn't align with Signal's.

You're also using the word bikeshedding in a way unfamiliar to me. I use that word to mean intense debate about inconsequential changes that don't matter, like the right color for a bicycle shed. Which ofc is ludacris because there is no right or wrong color for a bicycle shed. In contrast to that, there are absolutely product decisions about the app that are material to its desired and undesired functionality. If signal decided to change the functionality of their product and stop encrypting texts, would discussion about that be bikeshedding? Why then, is this change in functionality not of similar concern?

[uoaei]

The important part of "bikeshedding" is the part about ignoring more important changes by focusing on trivial changes around the edges. If stories are more than trivial, I'd like to know how.

Personally, I think call quality and server reliability with respect to private messages are more important for a service that is explicitly (and, until this change, exclusively) about private messaging, especially considering recent outages.

If Signal changed the encryption protocol to an insecure one, or simply removed it, then they are fundamentally altering the promise of the app vis a vis its core technology, ie, the essence of the provided service. Obviously that is analogous to the foundation of a house, not to the shed in the backyard.