a fiery take on yet another example of enshittification coming to pass to yet another community.

there are definitely a lot of nuances that are likely lost here. perhaps komoot could have stayed sustainable and small, but maybe with a fraction of the number of employees.

perhaps it wasn't sustainable at all with consistent volunteerism powering the community's infrastructure.

or maybe it's late stage capitalism notching another win for concentrated power and ownership over community power and ownership.

it's hard to tell without more specifics and a serious attempt to answer the questions, but my hypothesis is that if the company's foundation doesn't start with a foundation of shared community ownership, then komoot's future was likely not just predictable but unavoidable.

with that said, it's worth trying. we have wikipedia and openmaps as examples that there can be lasting community-open projects. they aren't without their own fundamental issues, but those issues seem more worthwhile for society to be resolving.