The text you quoted does not lean on asking questions as a defense. For the third time, I'm pointing out that the word "amoral" is not a character judgment.
I'm also not sure where you're getting that interpretation from. In fact, in your last comment, you said you were only "questioning their boycott."
> Fun fact, saying someone is without morals is also an ad hominem attack.
I'm not sure how to be any more clear that that's "immoral" (without morals) and not "amoral" (uninterested in morals).
> At no point during this exchange did they explain that they "researched the Iceweasel project before choosing it" or "explained how they evaluate projects" (both quoting you).
"Yes" and "I have been in the scene for years, and I have researched and sourced carefully" was a clear reply to you asking if they had done their research. It may not be satisfactory to you, but the question was answered. (They actually previously explained more about their research but edited out.)
I don't think we're going to see eye to eye, but it was nice chatting with you.