Let me put that one to rest quickly. NEVER. We (at least, I) cherish all the work that people are putting into this. By hashing out these alternative approaches, we are get to the core of our ideas.
re: what we say about LEDE on the home page. I am becoming fairly comfortable with the text on https://lede-project.org/playground/start2. It addresses the major points you mention (security, extensibility, updates, as well as security and support). It includes a few specific teasers about what you could do with it. And that section is less than a screen-full, so I don't feel that it's overlong.
As to the question of whether it's worth your time to take a whack at improving that text... I think the sense of the group is:
- We want a fair representation of the LEDE project for the home page.
- Short and punchy is good, since it keeps the reader engaged with information they understand/can relate to. (I vote for it, anyway.)
- We want to keep away from categorical, unsupported superlatives (best performance, best security, etc.) because they sound like marketing puffery.
- On the other had, we should clearly call out places that LEDE does excel.
- We also are reluctant to tout features that haven't necessarily been incorporated/proven, or won't ship in the initial stable release.
- I think there are no dreadful choices anymore - we've eliminated those by identifying better ways to talk about LEDE.
Finally, I want to point out that I'm not striving for consensus here: I don't think it's necessary (or even possible) for every member of the team to wholeheartedly endorse every word on the home page.
Instead, I would ask that we seek wording that we all can live with "on Day One".
We will have a better understanding of what the site should say once the first stable release ships. After the software has been out for a month or two, we can reflect whether the words that are on the home page match how we feel, or we can update them as needed.
Does this make sense? Thanks.