I thought the FAQ said you wouldn't refer to it as such:
> Because of this, we will not refer to the Confluent Community License or any code released under it as open source.
IMO it’s a deliberately deceptive technique to try to confuse the market and dilute open source.
I think you mean "dilute Open Source" with capitals :P
More seriously: most terms dilute over time, and it takes a lot of effort to prevent that. I wouldn't assume every instance is malicious
IMO it’s a deliberately deceptive technique to try to confuse the market and dilute open source.