On the contrary, you seem to be the one with his 'knockers in a knit' who is once again trying to muddy the water.
What I have given is my view of the events in the past relating to a full time employee of the RSPB who initially joined BF supposedly as an individual member. When his true identity later became known, he asked for part of the forum to be dedicated specifically for him to answer questions relating to the RSPB. Although this request was granted, it was quickly found to be something of a non-starter.
At the time I was opposed to any organisation having a dedicated voice on BF which, in my opinion, is for the benefit of individual members. I still feel exactly the same way. Don't forget that in the earlier example I am quoting from, this was initially achieved by what I consider to be a back-door method.
Turning to the present, some members may well be suggesting that the RSPB should be given a voice on BF but, as I'm sure most of them will have gathered, I do not subscribe to this view for the reasons I've already given. And if it ever came to a ballot, I would vote against such a thing ever happening and to keep BF independent.