I agree with @tomh . It was a minor case and without bad intention, but effectively, the community has been misled, including those who had been involved in getting this forward with the assumption this is just to get the SIG started. Even if it was just 10 minutes or so someone is involved to create a tag in a category - minor thing, minimal work - but it’s still making the community work for what still is a RH project. Community channels were only used to implement a decision done effectively by RH. This is not a way to start gaining trust.
It is hard for a big hegemon (which RH is in this community) to avoid imposing its preferences intuitively on the community by accident: it needs careful consideration of implications and precise planning and communication to ensure such an accident does not happen. The Council is likely to be crucial in this process: translating, explaining, filtering, feedbacking and “firewalling” (not in a hostile sense!) between RH and the Community: yet, as far as I have information (which is not much: thus this is only an assumption!), the Council seems to have acted as a passthrough entity in this case, and did so with one-way information provisioning most of the time. When information provisioning takes place matters.
I have not sufficient information to say what and where an error has happened (which in a community that lives from transparency is already a flaw in itself), but at first glance, I am not sure if RH has failed, or the Council?
The major problem: if that is a new norm, the Council became unpredictable for the community members who ain’t involved in internal RH information flows, and predictability is the core of governance towards those who are governed (at least if they want to be accepted+treated as the governors). Where is the boundary, the limits? Referencing the rules doesn’t help, as they give the Council more or less “unpredictable amounts” of power, that used to be balanced by transparency except in security/privacy-sensitive cases. That does no longer apply?
Again, this is a minor case, and I do not expect any bad faith or bad intention on any side, and I like the Hummingbird project to be integrated as far as I see it at first glance. It is more an underlying issue that I think should not be “just dismissed”, also for the sake of the Council.