What is the matter with the FSDG certification process?

This does not look good, there seems to have been a persisting bottleneck for years now:

https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/gnu-linux-libre/2023-03/msg00017.html

Bottleneck that PureOS seems to have easily navigated through. Before that, Parabola seemingly did not have to wait for years either. What is actually going on there? I guess people could check for themselves whether distros like Uruk meet the critera, but then the certification process becomes less useful, as if frozen, if not useless.

A couple of distros have been relegated for lack of support, but other actively maintained ones do exist and should arguably be listed. Is it lack of adequate internal resources at the FSF? The mailing list thread says that the FSF eventually became unresponsive, this usually means either lack of interest or lack of resources, or a mixture of the two. If this is a deliberate choice to try and focus efforts on a limited number of projects, it should be stated clearly. If this is because PureOS is a sponsor to Libreplanet, it should also be stated clearly.

Should the FSDG certification process lose its legitimity, the end of readily accessible desktop software freedom could be at stake. The "open source" side would have won and software freedom would soon become the privilege of a handful of expert users and a few obscure cults. Plus we would all be sporting red hats.