Thank you for your respectful answer & tone!
I will bring it up to the Governance Lead & the team and certainly we would like to collect more feedback on the matter from the community before passing on to the final decisions.
I want to notify you that we had an abstain policy for the respective proposals indicating creation/continuation of the mandate - even though I still believe that validators as community stewards should be able to approve or veto creation of such entities whatever the affiliation - as soon as there is no direct financial incentive.
This case is - to my mind - is more complicated than that. But a lot of things in governance and policies are broken to this present moment unfortunately.
We have no concept of “ethical” running for governance - nothing stops a candidate or a project seeking community funds, potential consumer chain to go into DMs of their validator acquaintances & ask for support. We can only vouch for validators to act independently and in unbiased way following their “validator constitutions”. Mind you, C1 even has one - unfortunately nothing on community elections in particular but we narrowed down a lot on the community funding 
Anyways, will be happy to see what people think -unlike me, community has the power to influence decision making of validators!