I think it could be a case of "my interdependent poly isn't your independent poly."
Both approaches resonate with me.
When I was younger, single -- I wanted an independent model. I wanted to be with my partner and beyond him? I didn't want to deal with it. I wasn't interested in his family, his friends, his other dating partners. Beyond what I needed to know for calendar (sorry, I have a family bday) or sex health (That person I'm seeing? It's looking to go lover soon....) I didn't care to know. If he wanted to share, I'd listen. But I wasn't going to ask too deeply. The expectation was that it was his job to keep them from crossing lines and if he couldn't? We could be done. The expectation was that I would be doing same on my end of things.
At that time I just didn't want drama, too many shared entanglements, etc. I knew the polymath was there -- it always is. But certain tiers for me were not close. It was "live in the present only." It was just the NOW -- no past entanglements or planning future ones. It was fun.
As a married with kids now? I want an interdependent model and as a result my polysaturation point is different. Past, present, and future entanglements do apply now. When there's entanglements like shared children, aging parents, mortgages, cars, bank accounts, other property -- my way of going is different because my emotional energy/time management is different than it used to be.
It's neither here nor there to me. I think interdependent and independent models each have their strengths and limitations -- just in different places. Both approaches can work within their respective models.