Hello, Guillermo.
"The community has received well the idea of a more open and fast process. But that can be achieved also by reforming the JCP. The community has not been asked how to achieve that more open and faster process."
The JCP tried itself to create a more open (fair playing field) process for years and failed due to legal reasons from Oracle - as explained elsewhere, Oracle has special powers in all JCP legal docs, and that's pretty much impossible to change. I'd say that's the more compelling reason to start anew somewhere else. For the historical reasons why that failed, you can look at the JCP EC archives for years (my company joined the EC in 2014 and I followed the end of that)
"Again, you are taking for granted the community prefers a new process that replaces the JCP over the continuation of the Java EE brand. Some public polls show different results, although they were all run from a subjective part of the community."
There's no "community" universally represented: there are players, bigger and smaller. I'd say that major contributors to the Java EE Ecosystem prefer something else, even if others (myself included) think that the JCP way would be better, if not for continuity. But me (and my company) are not major Java EE stakeholders. So, I respect their decision and work with that.
Regards,
Leo.