Fair enough, looks like I took this bit to be a separate point but related point he was making:
"If we both have Fanboost or are both without, I would be happy."
...but clearly I missed the connection to the condition he attached in the next sentence:
"We don't want a championship to be decided by Fanboost with this loophole."
But it does still come back to the fact that social media can literally influence the outcome of what is a sporting competition, I'm kind of surprised the FIA are okay with that - but clearly they are. Personally I'd prefer it not to be there.
Again, no.
di Grassi was advocating a push of FanBoost onto social media, and away from the website.
His stated concern is not that people are using the FanBoost as it was designed - fans voting for their favourite driver.
His stated concern is that teams are cheating.
Or, at least, using FanBoost within the letter of the rules but not the spirit. If teams are sat voting for their drivers then FanBoost becomes another battle of the teams rather than a fan popularity contest (which is what it was designed to be), so di Grassi would like more voting done via social media (where presumably there's a higher chance of someone being able to go back and weed out bots set by the teams, or at least a greater openness about it).
If you have a concern with/dislike of FanBoost, that's cool. But you can't link irrelevant articles to your argument in the hope that no one will read them and assume it's supporting your position.