The article closes with the question: "Does open source matter anymore?"

I wouldn’t pretend to have an answer. of course. Opens Source means, always meant, different things to different people.

I know what always counted for me:

1. Copyleft License

2. No CLA or Copyright assignment

3. Diverse group of contributors

I sympathize with Miguels point but it bothers me it clashes with point 3 in my list. If you hand select your contributors[1] you will never reach the diversity necessary to effectively make relicensing impossible. Without that Open Source matters less to me.

[1] I admit that controlled set of known contributors has other advantages too.

He is 'hand selecting' for people that show respect for others. Still plenty of room for diversity within that framework.

"Diversity" doesn't mean "zero thresholds for skill or respect".