That's more-or-less what I'm referring to. When you're dealing with a foundation that hasn't been bothered to fix decades-old issues in their software, sending engineers and paying for man-hours is exactly what gets things done. Since you're paying the engineers, you decide what they make. That gives you a considerable amount of control over the ecosystem, and explains how Linux users ended up in a development tug-of-war with enterprise patrons.
That still does not give you any more control. Anyone can still change the project or fork it or do whatever, just they do not because only the engineers working on it are the ones who do get anything done.
Anyway, the way to fix that would be to donate more to the foundation or to individual developers. In most open source projects, the non-profit foundation is not usually the primary source of engineers because they make a tiny amount of money compared to what the big enterprises do. But it is not very likely you will ever escape that tug-of-war, because developing an entire OS is very expensive.
