This is horse shit at best, social espionage at the other end. You are intentionally misusing this term.
Your data and the source can be used in any way you as the user sees fit.
It can be forked, it can be changed, your freedoms are enforced.
Sure, let's pretend that every user is a programmer who knows what a hard fork is and, even if he is a programmer, he's willing to create hard forks of each and every GNOME software he uses to support features that worked before and don't work now. This has worked out great for PopOS and Budgie right?
It's so much easier to just fall back on the open source argument and ignore the fact that it means nothing for the average user who doesn't know the first thing about C code or git to be able to make the changes he wants to.
I wish something called user choice and configuration options existed in this reality.
Sucks that end users can't "hard fork" and fix their shit, but I can't fix planes either, we all pay for our choices.