First let me say it’s refreshing to see a forum on the big bad Internet where people actually listen to each other and are capable of having an insightful discussion about a topic 
Anyway, I do think teppe is raising a valid point. What I’m slightly worried about though, is that people are jumping to Fairphone because they hope they get a device that’s entirely open and can be tinkered with all they like. Somehow, having a Google-free platform with open software, an open OS and open drivers has become more important to people than what FairPhone was initially started up for: problems in mining the raw materials, problems in production, problems in the end-of-life process of phones and trying to change the way we see our phones (as throwaway products).
Now everyone has different priorities with what they think is important, but for me personally, I think the stuff FairPhone is doing now in Congo, China and Ghana is much more important than whether or not I’m under the influence of big brother Google, or if I’m running the latest Android version or if I’m able to compile my own chipset drivers and run those instead of MediaTek’s proprietary nonsense. Frankly, those sound like first-world-problems to me.
Thing is, if you want open, secure and free (as in America), there are alternatives. It would be great to see all these things integrated in a single device, and possibly, one day, we’ll get there, but for now, those aren’t top priority for FairPhone and I think they shouldn’t be. I find it slightly worrying that people are getting riled up about not having the latest Android OS or not being able to run Firefox OS more so than about people dying in Congo getting tantalum out of mines under gunpoint.
Sure, these issues aren’t mutually exclusive. A phone-company can work on all those issues, but not when you’re just 30 man strong with an installed base of less than 50,000 units. That’s the reality of it right now.