They were compromised. Greed overtook the principles on which the project was founded and put the project at risk. They agreed from the start that Micay would own the project and hold the keys. They explicitly accepted those terms. Despite this, they tried a hostile takeover anyway.

Forking and building a separate build isnt dual signing, its just forking. You can do that right now with GrapheneOS and its build guide if you want.

Im not sure what you mean by the last part, GrapheneOS has been quite upfront with all of this from the start.

From a security-minded user perspective it makes sense to destroy keys when instead of a single entity I receive updates from I get another entity that is not equivalent, and half of my previous entity thinks that the other half is sus.

The GOS (GrapheneOS) lead had responded to criticisms like yours that he gladly retreats inside his tech role if others would take it upon them to refute the claims from rivals. So if you are that balanced, normal person, you could take that work out of his hands. Or help fund a full time PR person.

«In 2018, matters between Micay and Donaldson came to a head over Donaldson’s desire to pursue business deals with criminal organizations, and his attempts to compromise the security of CopperheadOS, including by proposing license enforcement and remote updating systems that would allow third-parties to have access to users’ phones. As part of this process, Donaldson began to demand that Micay provide Donaldson with the “signing keys” - i.e. the credentials required to verify the authenticity of releases of CopperheadOS. Donaldson advised that, in order to secure certain new business, potential customers required access to the Keys.»

Micay is rightfully paranoia, just having a GOS phone makes some government agencies quite mad. There are many ways a project like GOS could die, disinformation could certainly kill it. Other projects don't help the case if they throw mud at it. Rather, they should focus on their real technical shortcomings, but such articles aren't written somehow. https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm

EDIT

  > Should I make my own fork?

They have proven to "behave well" for years. Destroying the signing keys in the midst of a hostile takeover is the responsible thing to do. Its for the safety of their users. Thats a commendable trait to have.

You always trust the developers of software. The only way to stop that is to not use the software.

Micay owns the whole project. Ownership of the project was not exchanged or divided, part of the explicit terms of the agreement were that Micay would hold the keys and ownership of the project just as they always have.

Sure!

Thats a characteristic all modern OSs and modern apps have. You need to trust the key holders, always. Some people make their own builds for this reason. Depends on tge threat model.