So once again to the OP, despite your strongly phrased speculations otherwise, we will return to Scapple when the time is right to do so, and we’ll do so in force—not just token aesthetic refreshes and ceaselessly tooling around merely to make updates frequent enough so that people can come in and say, “ah, this program has been updated frequently, it must be good!”. Good things can exist without changing much or quickly, and if something is good for you, maybe that’s all you need. I believe that was the point of the hammer comment, not that the hammer as a tool hasn’t evolved over the course of 60,000 years. That was a personal metaphor, not an anthropological one.
However it is becoming increasingly clear that L&L have no intention of improving it whatsoever.
Never mind what I said earlier, it seems it doesn’t fit within your narrative. We have a difference in opinion over whether good software requires constant fiddling to be good. Personally, some of my favourite utilities don’t even have web pages any more. Some of my favourite utilities have so many updates I’ve turned off their update checkers because it’s annoying. Hey, my favourite Linux distribution is Debian precisely because they spend a long time getting things right, and then you sit on a stable version of the OS and all of your software for years while they work on the next.
What others are perhaps referring to as “aggressive” is that you’ve taken this difference of opinion and projected your own sensibilities onto ours. Because we don’t frequently update, that means we consider it dead and are arrogant in thinking nothing can be done to improve it, etc. It couldn’t possibly be that we just don’t agree with you on this point.