more implementations is a strength. FOSS has always been this way. "weak" is having a single implementation governed by a single group of developers and having everyone terrified to fork because they fear fiat NGD.

Better to fork than remain hostage to bitcoin core terrorists

It doesn't "fork the network" in that sense. Forks of this kind are the normal and healthy way for us to tighten protocol constraints. Otherwise we would have to say "well, we can never fix the inscriptions hack or tighten up unnecessarily loose parameters that are getting abused". This is the process of rolling out changes that are just responsible maintenance. 110 will get enough signa from nodes, the miners will have no other rational choice than to come along. This is healthy. It's just the node runners way of say "no, we don't want to host your shitcoining spam. Nice try capturing woke devs and shoving through your shitcoinery, Citrea."