A split within the Tox project

That's rich given similar donations-related malfeasance between the Ubuntu corporation (whatever it's called these days) and Kubuntu. If anything, the correlation is that there's money in the picture and a non-anonymous individual in a position of trust which can therefore be abused. Past experience tells us that it's only a matter of time before people in those positions end up in sufficient personal financial woes to either go ahead with embezzling the funds, or go hungry and homeless. At that point they'll justify said embezzlement with the project's continued existence, which now depends on their personal well-being.

The solution is not more structure and requirements of transparency that come with it, as proposed in the LWN article, but models that require less (ideally none) of both. As is usual with anon's projects, Tox was hurt by namefags, and its next iteration will hit the same bump if the issue persists. More generally this problem affects any project where someone less than a major contributor of source code (i.e. copyrightable works, being the project's distinguishing resource) is in a position to hold project infrastructure hostage, such as what Ubuntu is to Kubuntu.

As for the drive-by 4chan hate, I suppose it grates on some that the same board that spawned Tox also created C+= ("C plus equality"), the explicit and brilliant parody of popular pearl-clutchingly pious militant feminism. The cultural impact of that joke may be judged by how it was systematically purged from various git-based source code hosting services, once said militants cottoned on and started their howling campaigns against it. Certain groups just can't take being the butt of a joke.