Because i believe Wayland is fundamentally worse at a design level than X11. Why else would i post something like that?

And i too have lost interest on Linux (on the desktop at least) over time (incidentally also working on games but that is just a coincidence) and a main reason for that is all the push that Wayland gets despite its shortcomings from various big players. Wayland is most likely going to become the primary tech behind Linux desktop, but that wont be due to its merits, it will be due to the push it gets from companies with money.

Xorg is not a simple project and most people who may want to work on it will be hobbyists who more likely than not, wont be able to keep up with whatever breakage Wayland introduce. You can already see this sort of inability to keep up with "modern Free Desktop" breakage by looking at the projects that are developed by hobbyists in their free time and how slow they are in adapting from Gtk2 to Gtk3 - some still haven't fully adapted, yet Gtk is now breaking things again with Gtk4.

If only all that breakage was for something worthwhile. But in reality there is absolute no reason, yet is forced on everyone. Desktop programs in the 80s drew buttons, checkboxes, input fields and sliders. Desktop programs in the 90s drew buttons, checkboxes, input fields and sliders. Desktop programs in the 2000s drew buttons, checkboxes, input fields and sliders. Desktop programs in the 2010s drew buttons, checkboxes, input fields and sliders. I am absolutely sure that desktop programs in 2020s, 2030s, 2040s and forward will continue to draw buttons, checkboxes, input fields and sliders. There is no reason to break those programs, no reason to waste anyone's time rewriting programs that already work just to keep up with lower layer breakage, no reason to introduce additional dependencies just so you can avoid the breakage, no reason to waste time learning how to do the exact same stuff only now in a slightly different way, no reason to do any of that at all.

From my perspective Wayland has no reason to exist. At least no reason that has to do with what would be better for everyone NOT involved in its development.

While Windows has its issues (e.g. i do not like how it forces composition - also a reason i dislike Wayland - and how they remove customization options in a very hacky way) it is still better than Wayland (e.g. my old code still works without changes, i can write code that manipulate arbitrary windows, despite the hacks it is still very fast, etc). At least from my perspective. But i feel like choosing the least of two evils (not that X11 is perfect, but i'd prefer if all the wasted effort that went to Wayland was spent on improving Xorg).

So i decided to stick with Windows. The only way i could see myself doing what i believe is right is work full time on Xorg, toolkit(s) that take advantage of Xorg (instead of treating it as a dumb bitmap terminal) and programs that work with these toolkits. But i cannot do that and even if i could, the constant FUD against X11 from Wayland developers and fans make me wonder if it would be worth the effort in the first place.

FWIW i do not mind Wayland existing (even though i see no point in it personally) as much as i do not mind Arcan existing - or Qt existing, Gtk3 existing, ZSH existing, Ruby existing and any other project that provides an alternative option to another project. What i do mind is the manipulation going on to force me (indirectly mainly, through all the efforts going on - yes i know that technically nobody puts a gun on my head) to use Wayland. If i'm going to be forced something might as well be something i dislike less and due to the vast majority using it it has less problems.

Hence, Windows.