The ETF commitments were towards for example nostr:npub10pensatlcfwktnvjjw2dtem38n6rvw8g6fv73h84cuacxn4c28eqyfn34f which probably gave nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx the insights that lead to the recent rants without naming specifics. Yes, OpenSats "makes the rules" but as long as "the community" considers OpenSats a good actor, ETFs can just donate to them to support Bitcoin in a good way. If we all get up in arms against OpenSats because they screwed up, things get more complicated. If ETFs decide to hire their own armies of devs to push their agendas, it gets more complicated and of course, pouring billions of $$ onto OpenSats raises the stakes and attracts more ambivalent administrators and devs but it's not inherently a bad thing. Problems users have will get resolved either by open source solutions or by closed source, corporate for profit solutions and I fear the latter will remain the norm unless we scale up the efforts for the former.