What I think happened, as someone who's been using Discord daily since 2015, is that they came up with a slightly better product than the alternatives, spent enough in marketing (to gamers specifically) to convince investors that it was a platform worth investing in, and only then slowly started improving their faulty software.
To say people were manipulated into using Discord is obviously not true, but it's also disingenuous to deny the massive amount of marketing Discord pushed back when it first started, not only in advertisement but just branding in general.
I'm not going to address the latter part of your comment because I don't understand what you're trying to say. I'm of the belief that I'm allowed to voice the legitimate issues I have with the software that impact not only myself and other developers but users in general.
The last part of the comment was probably a reply to this: "I don't see how that's relevant? I don't even prefer those over Discord, but I don't think it's enough of an improvement to warrant the market share it has now."
You don't see how those valuable those improvements are but the average person does and that's why it has a massive market share.
To say people were manipulated into using Discord is obviously not true, but it's also disingenuous to deny the massive amount of marketing Discord pushed back when it first started, not only in advertisement but just branding in general.
I'm not going to address the latter part of your comment because I don't understand what you're trying to say. I'm of the belief that I'm allowed to voice the legitimate issues I have with the software that impact not only myself and other developers but users in general.