Given the recent articles or blog posts that may lead some people to think that dunc bank made people work against Debian, maybe some explanations are needed.

Dunc-bank is a single web page that some humourless people may find unfunny, YMMV, but that is nothing else than satirical. There was no conspiracy, undermining work, or power games. People claiming the contrary are just making complete fools of themselves. Really. The people that contributed to dunc-bank, meaning that did report most of the RC bugs in the last month are for some, even disgruntled when it comes to dunc-bank (I'm thinking e.g. of Lucas Nussbaum that did a full archive rebuild and reported many bugs).

No, dunc-bank is not the evil masonery club that some depict. The sole thing I think really happened, is that people are nowadays really concerned about QA, and that there is a whole lot of issues that can be tracked automatically, at home (a good ADSL line and a GHz grade CPU is largely enough to do an archive rebuild in a week nowadays). What is really a shame in fact, is that those checks are not performed by Debian for any package, and on a regular basis. The other factor is that I think many people had concerns with etch quality, as many discussions in the past month may have let think that its quality could suffer from the announced release date. Now that this bad joke is now officially a dead-line, I think this is less and less a concern.

That said, Yes, I do think some people that usually did good work in debian diminished their work considerably, and that it hurt the release. We lost some developpers (our locales + X-keyboard expert and that's a huge loss), some orphaned a lot of packages, and recent events do show that you can't improvise beeing the libpng maintainer a month before the release, and so on. Yes it's true that recent events and surroundings in Debian[1] have led people to feel they are strangers to what Debian is becoming. And blaming them for not beeing supportive is very distateful and shocking. When you do pursue actions, that will lead to big changes in the community, then blaming the community members for those changes is a shame.

So no, you can't blame the people behaviours (that have been reduced to dunc-bank supporters because that's so easy) for etch beeing late, because you can't blame the direct consequences of an action for beeing the cause of its failure.

Notes

[1] and not only dunc-tank, even if that's IMHO one of the biggest.