Given the meetup group has 2,000+ members, and they haven't had an event since the announcement, I have a hard time believing all, or even a majority, (since it's so rare for the majority to even speak) had much input on this decision.

The wording sounds like a few key members felt a certain way and decided to take the ball home with them instead of stepping down and leaving whoever didn't feel as strongly hurt to continue in their stead.

_

It happens often with groups past a certain size: Some people argue that having contributed to the growth up to that size justifies being able to take unilateral actions like this

But in my opinion, once you get past a certain size, it's larger than you. Even if you've poured blood sweat and tears in, it's obviously taken contributions from many small players, who may have been willing to step up as big players.

It's hard to believe that out of 2,000 people there's no group of people who couldn't have continued to get value out of the existence of the group post-Unity's actions.