Most of the time is just wasted effort. Yes, more ideas features, use cases, but I usually prefer one thing which is very high quality instead of a lot of small things which are never complete.
Go is definitely one of those languages. My most definitions I have not given it the proper chance, but the lack of generics just turns me off as an avid user of C++ and Rust, in the same way Java has always turned me off for lacking functional features other languages have had for decades.
For example, I've often thought about contributing webrtc peer support to various torrent libraries, but when I dig into them (libtorrent, libtransmission, libktorrent, etc) they are all 15+ years old codebases of either C99 or pre-C++03 C++. Considering I'm coming from Rust in my free time I know I would just drop the project within a week because of frustrations with the tooling and language.
If I ever really wanted to go the extra mile, I'd use it as a learning experience for some of the Rust GUI bindings and write my own torrent library. Reinventing the wheel yes, but I'd rather spend right now a thousand hours in Rust than a hundred in a really old C code base. I imagine many of these developers like Keats feel the same way.
I don't understand why people think this way since those same people certainly don't operate that way. It's just backseat driving how other people spend their free time. Just comes off as a circlejerk.
I like that phrase a lot, captures a lot about comments on OSS projects here in HN and elsewhere.
So basically I don't find it a valid reason to make an entirely new thing because the existing solutions did not worked the way you wanted.
I mentioned it in another comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15511028) but none of the things I wanted to change in Hugo could have been done.