It feels like it only exists to try and emulate the look and feel of a community-driven and community-governed FOSS construction while at the same time being in

It feels like it only exists to try and emulate the look and feel of a community-driven and community-governed FOSS construction while at the same time being in commercial control of Microsoft since that it what the value is to them. This makes sense, being beholden to shareholders and profit and all that, but not even pretending it's just commercial developer advocacy/evangelism (which would have been fine - lots of companies do this to various degrees of success) is red flags all over. It feels like they want to 'buy' and 'construct' community, which is generally not how those come to be. It's much more like the VB and COM days where they just try to convince developers that in the land of closed systems they haver the best development experience to reach business goals. But in the land of open systems, that push doesn't work. They would have been better off either copying the Apache Foundation or the CNCF, or just incubating their stuff in to one of them. But the first option would not have come with a community, and the second one would be risky since they would have to soft-compete with what's already there and they aren't all that convincing in their value proposition when you make that comparison. The foundation isn't inherently evil or bad, it just isn't what the larger FOSS or OSS communities expect and thus it's not getting the same traction and benefits, making the whole exercise feel dead in the water and not useful to anyone.