Yeah, I saw the original guilt-by-association smear posted in the CircleID comments.
The whole story wasn't told, which is to be expected in such a lame rebuttal. CALInnovates was not against "net neutrality" per se but a single provision of a single proposed law -- the prohibition against a telco's bundling free services into its retail offering (ie, data used to access XYZ service aren't counted against one's monthly cap). The practice has some anti-competitive potential, but also has the potential to save significant money for the poorest consumers who are already using those services. In most other positions it's taken, CALInnovates has been broadly pro-entrepreneur in a number of realms. And as it claims to be a "coalition of tech companies, founders, funders and non-profits", there's no passing-off as a grassroots org so the astroturf claim is utterly bogus.
But that point is moot. In some peoples' world, communities of advocates must be either allies or enemies forever. Not mine. The ICANN reality -- and most other realities -- are much different, where various issues can find the strangest of bedfellows aligned. While on ALAC I fought some constituencies aggressively on some issues only to be fully aligned with them on others the next day. This is not "odd"; it's real life, it requires diplomacy and tact, and it works.
And finally. These days, the demonizing of a person or entity because of a perceived bad past action -- singled out against a body of good work -- is rightly exposed as cancel culture and widely despised. Such odious tactics are to be identified and rejected, here and anywhere.
In summary; an inaccurate, badly argued, unremarkable act of desperation.