To be fair, a bus driver probably isn't writing a self-hosted service anyway. So if there is an issue with the service init 3 years later, they will probably file a bug and let the maintainer handle it. And they wouldn't be parsing a bash script for a sysV-init if that broke either? SysV-init was to complex for the layman as well. Because gracefully starting and stopping system services with their dependency chains is generally too complex for the layman as well.

There's this strange idea that laymen self-hosters are doing all this stuff and the choice of init system matters in the lease. They were going to run the command to start the service blindly regardless of which init system it was and if it breaks, they aren't going to really troubleshoot either one.