This is described as a restriction for which “a fix” is proposed, which seems to imply it is an oversight or an unfortunate consequence of some other requirement. Looking back at the proposal as passed, this seems very intentional and is explicitly stated to be the intent.
I think it’s misleading to label this “a fix”. This proposal suggest to rewriting, even rendering moot to some extent, very clearly stated parts of the passed OpCo proposal. We ought to apply all scrutiny due to such an endeavor, not just greenlight it as a small adjustment to fix some oversights.