Theory or Reality
In theory a foundation would be neutral and users would be able to govern the project to the benefit of all. But in reality, it is very hard to set up a governance scheme that is not vulnerable to being dominated one major group to the detriment of others. So the question is not whether project X should be under a foundation but whether whoever is running X is doing a reasonable job managing it to the benefit of the wider community. If the project is being run well then I would leave its governance alone. If it is not being run well, why are you using it would be a fair question.
A problem Itsy Bitsy Morons failed to note is, just because something is proposed does not automatically mean it is actually beneficial to the wider community or to the project. And someone has to play the role of BDFL to keep the project on track.
