What we know is:

- there have been problems with the frame breaking with a number of Tern models, resulting in several (relatively small) recalls. This is not nice but can happen. And a recall is the proper way of dealing with the issue.

- the reason given for the recalls was (if I remember correctly) problems with a certain subcontractor in the early days of Tern. Based on the recalls and some of the defects this seems only to be part of the truth - along with bad craftsmanship there possibly seems to be a construction issue (that may have been fixed through changes in the construction at least with the latest verge-model some time in the past, I do not now how the situation is on the Link-model). Not totally convincing but also not necessarily frightening.

- Additionally there have been issues with the hinge bolt getting loose or lost on a number of Tern Links (and also Bickerton Mk Xs) - basically all Links until the change of the bolt-design are possibly affected - that are caused by an unclever construction of this bolt. No recall has been made regarding this issue as far as I know. Unfortunately the possible (!) impact is similar to a breaking frame in the worst case. But you can change the bolt to a revised design and/or have an eye on it both of which hopefully will solve the issue. Not brilliant and not good for building trust in the brand, but manageable.

- There are furthermore reports about a number of breakages of frames that have not been part of any recall and at least one that has even been testified by Tern before the breakage that the bike would not be affected. This is somewhat frightening. Especially as the possible impact of a damage is massive - death in the worst case.

I can absolutely understand anybody who has lost any faith in Tern by this situation. I myself did not ride my Bickerton Mk X after years ago I got aware of the first breakages that were reported and the recalls were made afterwards as it's frame number met the schema of the potentially affected bikes. Neither did I sell it because I did not want to possibly endanger a buyer. A pity, as it was a pretty expensive bike and barely ridden until then - list price something like 1800 € if I remember right. This situation went on for years as my request to Bickerton regarding the situation with my bike kept being unanswered until via this thread I got finally confirmation from Mark Bickerton that my bike was not affected.
Noticing shortly after that that even bikes that got clearance from Tern still broke did not make me happy. So yes, I can fully understand any bad mood, the more as I am potentially affected by the issue myself.

On the other hand we have no idea how many bikes were built, how many broke and how many are really affected. We probably can assume that over the course of the last six(?) years up to a couple of 100.000 Tern bikes have been built. And we only know of a handful of breakages and even less aside of the recalled bikes. Thousands and thousands are bing used out there on a daily basis w/o problems, at least as far as I know. So maybe the ratio of breakages to bikes built is within industry standards - just our emotions tell a different story. Emotions, not the brain. It may even be the case that the changes in the design may have been made to strengthen the frame but that frames w/o these enhancements are generally safe apart from a tiny amount that have issues resulting from problems in production. Or the opposite - we simply do not know and as we do not now the numbers we cannot objectively judge on the risc.

An unknown risc probabilty combined with a possibly deadly impact leads to avoidance - which is a pretty rational strategy but possibly an over-reaction. As said before: We don't know and unfortunately we cannot judge on that.

Until here everything seems pretty reasonable to me. The hysterical part comes in when Mark Bickerton gets attacked personally for being part of an "evil empire" and held personally responsible for things that other parts of the company did. To my knowledge did he neither construct or weld the frames nor write letters to Downtube in the name of Tern nor do we have proof that he is part of a Tern-wide conspiracy or something like that.
I call it also hysterical claiming from a very unsharp video where one can barely identify anything to have proof that Bickerton bikes also broke.
Or when claiming to have proof that Tern bikes in general are dangerous or "all break", based on reports of breakages of bikes with unknown frame number and build date and Tern as a company and Josh Hon as it's leader endanger their customer's lifes on purpose. Things like that are not helpful and do not foster a clear view on the situation.

I personally would probably currently not buy a Tern and even less a used one - which is a pity as they seem (apart from the issues) to be proper bikes for the money. On the other hand I own enough bikes that I do not have this problem - do not need another one. I have not yet ridden my Bickerton Mk X again and am not sure if I ever will or if I will dare to sell it - result from the unhappy situation with Tern bikes. Still not happy.