That quote implies that the subject is providing some value to users that makes it worth staying on the network. Do you believe Ethereum, Bitcoin, or other networks are providing value to people?
If you believe there is value, you must simply disagree with the implementation, degree of centralization, principles, etc. I'm curious which project you think has the best qualities.
If not, you should have no qualms with leaving the network.
I would guess that it's easier for someone with an Ethereum wallet to send money to someone with a Bitcoin wallet than it is for someone on Facebook to send a message to someone's Mastodon account.
My guess may be wrong, as I don't have any of the above, but I think that your analogy overlooks the interoperabilities of the systems you are comparing. To some extent, the lack of interoperability is the only thing keeping people on Facebook.
By the same token, a person who happens to use Facebook can also "send messages" to a person on Mastodon. They just won't be FB messages from the FB account.
At no point has anyone said anything useful about the interoperability of either system, let alone how they compare to one another. All we have learned is that everyone is equally free to have a bunch of accounts, whether they be social media accounts or cryptocurrency wallets.
This is why I think Mastodon et all should store their account data and user identity details clientside. That's how to ensure it's easy to switch services without losing your existing network by default.
