i have written many spaghettis in my life but never very big ones and i tend to get really antsy about the spaghettification - but what is usually done when you make a big spaghetti is you throw it out and try to start again, usually by piecing it back together again
what most nostr devs are doing is making one big spaghetti after another, instead of trying to fix it
the psychology is simple to understand: spaghetti is very hard to unravel, and the incentives are that if they make a new spaghetti they keep getting paid
there is no quality discipline in the grants process so this is how people do it - they are just doing what amounts to make work, and that's why me and nostr:npub1l5sga6xg72phsz5422ykujprejwud075ggrr3z2hwyrfgr7eylqstegx9z are always saying that opensats et al are like a communist bureaucracy, their only goal is to keep the donors coming, so their jobs are secured, and the devs they pay, are doing the same thing
Yes, there's no quality incentive in the grants process. No nonfunctional requirements in the agreements, no acceptance test phase, no maintenance contract, nothing.
Just vibe some flashy crap together, toss it to the long-suffering users, grab the money and run.
Anytime something solid is produced, it's despite the grants process, not because of it.
There was a void. We're filling it.
