GP was defending EA even though TFA clearly explains how stolen money by SBF was used to buy a $16 mansion in the UK by the EA movement, all the while knowing SBF was living a lavish lifestyle but presenting him as an altruistic genius.
In other words: GP's comment defends EA without taking into account the facts shown in TFA.
Article is BS, that money wasn't stolen. The decision making behind the purchase was transparant. Furthering the cause of EA itself was a goal of the specific fund from which they drew that money [1]. It gives them a place to have big nice conferences, which drives donations which will well exceed $16M.
Anyway, I didn't donate to that fund. I donated to the Global Dev fund [2]. If you donated to fund [1], then you knew your money would be spent on stuff like conferences.
In other words: GP's comment defends EA without taking into account the facts shown in TFA.