I'm completely neutral in this entire thing, not affiliated with anyone involved, but Leah Rowe's response to the message you linked is quite dubious to my eyes

I'm completely neutral in this entire thing, not affiliated with anyone involved, but Leah Rowe's response to the message you linked is quite dubious to my eyes and makes me think I should take the rest of her statements with a pinch of salt. Selectively quoting (read the full response at [1]): "The article complains that there was no consensus among developers in the libreboot project, but this isn't actually true. Or, rather, it is true in a different way. In reality, most people in the project are neutral about the issue, or were actually supportive of the decisions taken. Leah simply decided to take the morally correct action, in exposing corruption at the FSF." Just seems to hide behind moral rhetoric and vague statements about alleged consensus without addressing the actual issue Zammit appears to raise, which is that no one except Leah appears to (be allowed to) speak for the libreboot project on a policy level. Zammit states that Leah appears to misuse her leadership of the libreboot project for her personal views and her response (Leah simply decided to take the morally correct action, in exposing corruption at the FSF) seems to confirm that. [1]: https://libreboot.org/gnu/ https://libreboot.org/gnu/