It’s not significant, you’re not missing anything. Pando never really took off or did anything. It launched with a big boom because of the relationship with TC but never got any traction on its own.
A larger number of people than before learned it was mainly funded by U.S. government groups of the sort paranoids might worry about. They do it to help both our cops/spies and foreign dissidents in governments the U.S. targets. Then, other groups in U.S. government are opposed to it since it conceals the threats to us (Four Horsemen of the Infacalypse) or just them (i.e. whistleblowers). "Left hand, right hand" thing on top of Pando's drama-inducing presentation typical of media outlets.
Tor supporters' reactions to it were even more interesting than the article, though. It was quite a test of both their honesty and public relations.
"wondering why I should care" is at least passively a toxic comment. At least take the time to click on the link before making a comment like that. Or just ignore the article.
Assuming bad faith is more damaging to discussion than dismissiveness. Your using the word "toxic" to describe the comment is more toxic than the comment itself.
Ed: if you had led off with
> The sentence works without asking "why I should care?"
