you are talking about philosophical relativism and using a philosophically progressivist bias to claim legitimacy.
at some point, Alice and Bob's linux will diverge to the point that Charlie will recognize neither as being linux, at which point there needs to be some basis for legitimacy to have a common ground, which in turn 'devolves into asking questions about power' (e.g. authority/legitimacy)
one can certainly be too fixed in ones approach, but the inverse is also true.
if bob, alice and charlie all work for an organization of people delivering 'the same linux' (whether open source/community driven or public company), what will a consumer of this 'linux' recieve when they get it?
which in turn 'devolves into asking questions about power' ..
ultimately we need to be on some same page, even if it is a bunch of post it notes on a desk and not a neatly bound hardcopy, so i wouldn't let the dualism implicit in being relativist create a false dichotomy whereby being organized at all is somehow outside of the realm of possibility.
what does your vision of 'keeping track of being on the same page' look like, if the page doesn't even need to exist to be on it?
or does so-called software 'enlightenment' require dissociating from all fixed concepts altogether? (show me the computer that will work this way and not be a magic spell, quantum included, since we are talking about 'being realistic')
