OSI announces board election results

> Before the OSI came along, my complaints were that the FSF was too focused on the GNU
perspective, and the Debian project, the only other group really studying the problem in any
depth, had discussions that were too hard (and often too contentious) to follow easily.  So
then the OSI comes along and offers me information I already knew, brings nothing new to the
table, and tries to convince the world that everything is black-and-white and there are no
shades of grey, which is utter nonsense.  That benefits me how?

At least for me, the hope was that a cool logo and trademark-controlled name would be a
beneficial marketing campaign for free software, along the lines described in
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-software-for-fre... but right from its launch
announcement ten months after the initiative
http://web.archive.org/web/20010204001000/http://www.open...
you can see how the OSI corporation deviated from that hope, improperly privatising common
community resources and generally screwing things up - drunk on powerful fuel?

So no, OSI's black-and-white licensor-lawyer-driven system doesn't benefit anyone.