I think you may have made a few jumps here. For one, can you show me where it states clearly in that proposal discussion description that “…It clearly says TGF needs legal protection from authorities.”? I think what the general sense was, which I fully agree with, is that this community needs a legal strategy (however, how to get there from here was open to discussion). It did present one path forward for discussion, however there were concerns with that particular path around governance (or particularly bypassing governance - which I mentioned that I was concerned with too, while also agreeing however that there is a legal strategy needed, and there is a way to deal with the contractual, property, etc. aspects as well that was already created). This was the point of that particular discussion - to discuss.
It just seems you posted some material that easily made some insinuations, and then when there was a discussion, that included some thoughts that could be answers to those aspects, it did not seem like you, and a few others, were really interested (which seems a little suspect to me - particularly since it seems every spend proposal brings a wave of attacks on those who are attempting to help).
Thank you though for sharing why with me, I appreciate that.