@weex we have the #activitypub:fep here for discussions, and yes you could PR I think if the errors are not substantial. For more substantial revisions I asked the question before: FEP-a4ed: The Fediverse Enhancement Proposal Process - #31 by aschrijver
Discourse keeps a bunch of metrics, but not the means to analyse them in any proper detail. Below you see some metrics from the last year:
But this is not really useful. DAU and MAU are not recorded separately. In general there are some active “usual suspects”, that - when taken off these metrics, will significantly lower the graphs.
In this SocialCG meeting post @bengo pointed to a repo that until that time I had no knowledge of. Then there are the issue trackers in both the AS and AP spec repo’s. Follow-up was in: Social CG Issue Trackers
In terms of bringing links togeter I suggested having them all in a menu above this forum, but instead they were moved by @how to a (still incomplete) wiki post. Which makes them not findable once more, I am afraid 
I know you are saying this jokingly, but I’ve heard the argument of the SocialHub being some kind of centralized service a number of times before. That’s the wrong way to look about it, unless we are becoming a million-people conglomeration. I see us as an essential node in the decentralized fabric. A single instance with but 528 users. But we are not a platform either.
We are a community of people sharing a common interest.
And a very important community for the entirety of the Fediverse. The fragmentation in this regard does not have those upsides imho and in this case.