First of all, TJC platform allows voting for every single topic there is. It's not like Jolla "let community vote on having offline maps and navigation" and were in any way bound to deliver it. It is merely an indicator of what the community wishes and they have to decide if they are able to implement and deliver those or not, or if there is something more urgent. However, on exFAT debacle it was different as supporting bigger SD-cards was an option on crowdfunding, which resulted in question about the money used on licensing, which resulted in heated debate should it be paid or not. No-side was winning (unfortunately in quite big majority), so it was natural for them to listen to the community on that point.

But maybe they won't ask any longer but make the decisions by themselves in the future. Seems to be better option.

Well, Nokia was not about to give them accesss to HERE maps, which was to be their major selling point in the Windows Phone venture. Nor they intended to create a Sailfish port of it.

That is a question you'll have to find your own answer. Just remember that Nokia was in no way obligated to give Jolla anything. They might have done something for considerable amount of money, but I doubt Jolla ever had such money to throw in.

Most likely they intended to create the scalability part later when it's time to launch another devices. Considering how immature Sailfish was on launch, I really don't think it would have been wise to throw in resources on such thing at that time.

My point is, that quite a bit of the bashing is completely disregarding situations and reasons that led to certain decisions. They are screwed, yes. But it does not mean that every suggestion is better than the choices they have made, especially when we are talking about things that require great deal of time, money and other resources. So pardon my scepticism.