[cnst]

> That seems like an entirely fair statement to make for somebody who is on the board of The Linux Foundation.

You have to follow the money.

Even the original article admits that she's on the board specifically from Microsoft. That means she's representing Microsoft's interests. Thus has to choose words carefully to not be discounted like a total shill from Microsoft.

To put it in other words: Microsoft pays her 200k+/year to represent their interests at Linux Foundation; Microsoft also pays Linux Foundation XXXk/year to have their representative at the Foundation. The title of the original The Register article is kind of sensational and incorrect, in that it portrays the speaker as having the allegiance to the Foundation, which doesn't appear to be the case on closer examination.