Explain? I'm not trying to be offensive or mean, it's just that the reasons given for the RFC had little to do with Wikimedia and reminded me of a typical mora

Explain? I'm not trying to be offensive or mean, it's just that the reasons given for the RFC had little to do with Wikimedia and reminded me of a typical moral crusade. For example, when they say that it is a huge stain on wikimedia's reputation when the reality is that they started accepted crypto donations 8 years ago with absolutely no controversy (a part from this one)... that to me reeks of projection when almost no one actually cares a part from themselves. So there's no actual reputational damage, it's just a rhetorical argument to avoid saying "I don't like it so it shouldn't be accepted". Which is usually a pretty frowned upon argument in the wiki community