When you’re on the asking side, sure, instant gratification is great. On the answering side, not so much. Chat interfaces are not a good fit for anything you may have to mull over for a while, or do some investigation before answering, and for anything where multiple such threads may occur in parallel, or that you want to reference later.

[The following is intended as language-agnostic.]

It’s useful to distinguish between interface and implementation dependencies. I agree that there shouldn’t be circular interface dependencies between modules. The absence of circular interface dependencies allows separate compilation of modules. It also means that at least in principle, the implementations can be made non-circular (can be refactored to non-circular without breaking any of the existing interfaces). But it’s often okay for the implementation of A to depend on the interface of B, and at the same time the implementation of B to depend on the interface of A, as long as there is no mutual dependency between the interfaces of A and B.

I'm curious, which language/dev communities did you pick this up from? Because I don't think it's universal, certainly not in the Java world.

DI in Java is almost completely disconnected from what the Strategy pattern is, so it doesn't make sense to use one to refer to the other there.