The thing is... the alluring thing about side projects _is_ not having that clear objective. Most of our jobs are directed by clear objectives, side projects are great for experimentation without clear potential for personal gain (fun, fame or fortune), often you will at least gain a unique experience and learn, which is a good trade for a little time.
Perhaps what happened here is a side project grew into something larger, it's now just a project, and he fell into putting more time and effort into it without making a conscious decision due to popularity - perhaps that's when it can bite you, when you realise you don't enjoy it anymore and it's become one sided.
I think side projects should stay as small as possible unless there looks to be a real potential for both yourself personally and the rest of the world - even then failing fast feels like the best idea.
For small personal projects, I think a fair rule of thumb is: is anyone else using it? Once that answer turns to yes, you need to get your exit plan in place.
And +1 for failing fast. It is failing slow that’s the disaster.
It depends on what commitments you made to your users. It could be as simple as just abandoning the project or it could be something more elaborate like handing it over to someone else.
But why do you have to think about this "as soon as you have your first user"? Not every project is a business and not every project needs an "exit plan". Not everyone doing a project needs to think in entrepreneur terms.
The “exit plan” could be as simple as “do nothing and abandon it”. You don’t “have to” do anything and are under no obligation to do anything, however decency says that in some circumstances you probably should.
When you have people using your stuff, you have to decide whether you care about them or not. It’s ok not to care, you don’t owe anybody anything, but if you lead them on or give them the impression that you do, then they are invested in something because of it and it would be pretty shitty to just disappear. You still can, if you like, but you should at least do it consciously.
If you have people the impression that you would support something then you need to be clear with them that this isn’t actually the case, otherwise you’re a bit of a dick for leading them on. It’s perfectly ok to just throw something out to the world without supporting it in any way and it’s also ok to step back from something you did once support, but you should at least communicate this so people don’t get the wrong impression.
The terminology doesn’t matter. It’s used here because this is a very entrepreneurial audience and most people understand what is meant by it. I don’t think anyone means to imply that you need to treat your hobby/side projects like a business.
Well, the terminology matters to me. The language we use tends to frame how we think about issues. I find the language of entrepreneurship distasteful when used outside a business context.
Perhaps what happened here is a side project grew into something larger, it's now just a project, and he fell into putting more time and effort into it without making a conscious decision due to popularity - perhaps that's when it can bite you, when you realise you don't enjoy it anymore and it's become one sided.
I think side projects should stay as small as possible unless there looks to be a real potential for both yourself personally and the rest of the world - even then failing fast feels like the best idea.