It depends on what exactly the complainant was proposing to change in the protocol.
There are no details in the link you provided about what was insecure about the protocol at that time, not to mention the proposed fixes. Is there another link for that?
> Not exactly the kind of attitude I'd like to see from the stewards of an "open" protocol.
Are you talking about the development process that led of the 1.0 protocol, or the spec itself?