This seems to me like a fundamental problem related to tight-coupling in Rust. For contrast in C there is one discussion space handling ISO C standard, different one handling implementation in GCC, different ones handling distribution of libraries (individual Linux distributions) and different many discussions spaces just for talking about coding in C, all these are totally administratively independent. In Rust, everything is tightly-coupled under one societal governance.

Could you go into more detail on what you mean by "associated religious obligations"?

As a developer using rust I'm not quite sure what you are refering to.

I think the OP means that all too frequently those who advocate the use and adoption of Rust come across to others as bringing certain ideological, social, or political assumptions which can be off-putting to some groups and individuals.

That is just my perception of what could be meant. I am not involved and just watching the developments as a spectator.

I think this blog post is quite promising. It seems like both the specific issue at hand and the larger structural problem of who the core team is accountable to are being addressed. All in all, the handling of this issue on all sides inspires confidence.