Here is the thing you have to understand about VCs (and therefore, companies and websites that have accepted VC money), always and forever. Repeat it like a mantra.

--- Venture capitalists do not invest in the company. Venture capitalists invest in the exit. ---

Eventually any site, app whatever has a Sell Out Moment. They get bought by a big established corp, they go IPO, something. There is an "Exit". If you accept VC money, you are *promising* that Exit day is coming and it will be *big*.

Generally the VC model does not look like you invest in a company and you expect your investment to get a bit bigger. It looks more like, you invest in ten companies and you expect nine to fail and one to make back *more than 10x* what you invested in it.

VC startups, when they're trying to build groundwork for an Exit, often do warm & fuzzy market-irrational things like build a personal relationship with happy customers. The exponential payoffs the VCs want don't look like making people happy.

If you see people alarmed at a Twitter replacement "taking VC money", this is the reason that's alarming. A company might have the most well-meaning, nice people running it, but those nice people will have to deliver an Exit. We are no longer in the era you can even really hope that Exit will be an IPO. "Well, now the cruel hand of the market rules us" is too much to ask. We've now established the most profitable Exit for a social media company is to sell to a Musk/Murdoch/Trump style oligarch.
@mcc This already happened before: LiveJournal died by being sold to Russians.