GitHub's log streaming also sucks. It's very laggy and chunked, whereas GitLab's is pretty much real-time.
The same is not true for "open source", which is a purely linguistic construct.
Unless this authority has some ownership over the term and can prevent its misuse (e.g. with lawsuits or similar), it is not actually the authority of the term, and people will continue to use it how they see fit.
Indeed, I am not part of a movement (nor would I want to be) which focuses more on what words are used rather than what actions are taken.
Looking up open-source in the dictionary does include definitions that would allow for commercial restrictions, depending on how you define "free" (a matter that is most certainly up for debate).
The term "open-source" exists for the purposes of a particular movement. If you are "for" the misuse and abuse of the term, you not only aren't part of that movement, but you are ignorant about it and fail to understand it— which means you frankly have no place speaking about the meanings of its terminology.
Open source has a well understood meaning, including licenses like MIT and Apache - but not including MIT but only if you make less than $500million dollars, MIT unless you were born on a wednesday, etc.
If you don't get sound there it won't work anywhere. A surprising number of problems like these can be solved by selecting the correct audio input source (provided your computer shows more than one).