The key idea: that he is an ILBP (or has been in 10 years) is absurd. He is not, and he claims he's not hurting for money.
This attitude denies support to projects like NTPsec, for which he's the technical lead, your take on this concept only applies to current maintainers of existing projects.
Even then, he's converting GCC to git, the latter indirectly bears a great deal of "Internet Load".
So no: they don't get my support. Why would they? Same with DNSsec. Useless project, please desist.
You can find it in the thread on his blog post titled (I am not making this up) "Thinking like a master programmer, redux".
Another fun fact: Cure53 audited ntpd and ntpsec concurrently, and found an instance where ntpsec rewrote a function and managed to regress out a patch for a security vulnerability, reintroducing it into their codebase. (By the way: overwhelmingly, with I think just one exception --- not counting the regression above --- the significant findings in that report applied uniformly to both ntpsec and ntpd).
Additional fun: until 2017, the ntpsec project apparently didn't even enable system/runtime mitigations like ASLR (according to the "Fix/Validation log" in the Mozilla SOS project).
Conclusion of that report: "While the NTPsec project emphasizes cleaning up its ancestors’ flaws, the difference regarding quality between the original code and the current implementation was not as great as anticipated."
Apropos of nothing at all, if someone were to gather his greatest hits into some sort of collection, it should probably be named Bearin' Load