Oh, my objections aren't of the "spy novel" variety.
That comment wasn't aimed at you. I don't think. I'd have to go back and re-read the entire thread to be sure. :-)
I'm just talking about the motives of those who represent and help drive open-source communities forward. The chances that Gavin will be bought off by the CIA as a result of this conference speech are nil. But it leads to potentially unfortunate project-management dynamics if, when the one chosen as "development lead" is asked to speak somewhere, he pockets the fee as if he has earned it personally rather than as a result of the efforts of the community of developers.
Well, by that logic, one could argue that all the bitcoins ever mined are the result of the efforts of the community of developers, and should not be pocketed by the miners.
As far as I'm concerned, what Gavin does with whatever money is left over after he's finished is none of our damn business. You clearly disagree, and it's pretty clear neither one of us is going to convince the other. Gavin's accepting of the engagement and fee is not going to affect my involvement in this project (I have already submitted one pull request and have more planned when time permits).
BTW - we do agree about certain people distorting the discussion :-)