Because people typically hate that.
And what do people in this forum think about the Signal foundation?
I have no complaints so far. I’m sure at some point I might (Because its unreasonable to expect to agree with every decision an organization makes). I have a lot of respect for Signal and those behind it (both before and after the foundation was formed)
there should be a reason to do that
If you and I can want a private messenger to succeed and can contribibute towards that goal, why would it be any different for someone with more money? I am often skeptical of large donors, but Brian Acton seems earnestly and authentically interested in Signals success and mission.
My guess is his interest is in part the result of how things played out with Whatsapp and wanting a second chance at building a better private messenger that isn’t co-opted by Meta et al.
like useless “story” feature
Because many people like that kind of feature. You can call them “useless” but it isn’t any more useless or frivolous than the emoji you just used. Should they have ignored emojis and reactions because some people consider them frivolous or not serious?
Signal has always been a messenger that hopes to appeal to the mainstream to the extent that is possible without compromising on security. From the beginning they’ve sought to make privacy accessible to the masses. Part of that means building a messenger that is not just functional but is also fun to use, useful for a variety of types of users, easy, and familiar feeling.