Add Synod.im client

[Lucas-FManager]

Description

Adds Synod.im to the Matrix ecosystem client list using the existing client metadata format.

Root cause: the ecosystem catalog did not have a Synod.im entry, even though the issue links live App Store and Google Play listings.

Code shape: single content-only page; no template, build, dependency, or runtime behavior changed.

Security assessment: low risk. This adds static metadata only, with no scripts, secrets, auth handling, dependencies, redirects, or user-input processing. Store links are generated through the repository's existing package metadata fields.

Verification:

• rg -n "Synod\.im|im\.synod|id1488171544|LUKi" content\ecosystem\clients\synod-im.md
• git diff --check

Note: zola is not installed in my local environment, so I could not run a full local site build here.

Related issues

Fixes #3430

Role

Individual contributor. I am not affiliated with Synod.im, LUKi e.V., or Matrix.org. This PR was prepared with AI assistance through Codex and reviewed before submission.

Timeline

No deadline.

Signoff

The commit is signed off.

[github-actions]

Thanks for contributing to the matrix.org website. I have automatically marked your pull request as a draft. Please restore the PR template to your PR description and follow our contributing guidelines, then undraft to let the team know the PR is ready for review.

[github-actions]

Thank you for applying the PR template. The PR is now ready for review by a human.

[MTRNord]

Hi!

Based on our AI Policy I am going to reject this PR.

Your description formatting makes me seriously question this PR was done by a human and instead looks like vibe coding.

This further seems enforced based on the activity on the GitHub profile which feels somewhat unusual for a human contributor.

---

Beyond that I think we have to discuss internally the scope of the ecosystem again. If we start to list element reskins we would likely also have to consider other projects' re-skins like gomuks-web ones. Which at least to me makes it doubtful how valuable this would be. Possibly the ecosystem section scope has to get tightened. However, this likely needs further talks with various stakeholders.

[awtj8o81ryywg793]

Quoted from a previous comment:

Beyond that I think we have to discuss internally the scope of the ecosystem again. If we start to list element reskins we would likely also have to consider other projects' re-skins like gomuks-web ones. Which at least to me makes it doubtful how valuable this would be. Possibly the ecosystem section scope has to get tightened. However, this likely needs further talks with various stakeholders.

See #3434.