The intention to fix something has a logical audience. It’s not this one.
I have seen enough of Charles and his team as they talk about what’s good and what’s not; what’s working and what’s not. Which is why we should be getting these reports from the those qualified (I.e. FP Complete I think was the auditing organization for an external audit of the code).
I think before anyone is allowed to say things/imply things with out facts or any credibility should not be posting to this audience. If I had concerns about a project (and I was qualified technically) I would just. State the facts, cite sources of where the data came from and how I arrived at my conclusion.
This is what a professional does. The activity so far that I see that they have actually done is 1.) state an unstated vague ‘concern’. The result is to only cause baseless concern. Which is what it it right now - baseless.
So the actions are to make you nervous. That’s all we now. We can speculate why etc. but there is no point. These are all accomplished, scientists from all over the world.
The person who is posting is the one who should be looked into.