I think R. Broyde’s point is as follows:
LWMO (YCT, Open Orthodoxy, or whatever else you want to call them) has been advocating and implementing some troublesome halachic innovations. The fact that they are troublesome or innovative should not be reason to expel them from the MO or orthodox camp, however, since they remain committed to developing their p’sakim in the context of proper halachic decision-making (relying on sources; on what they see as a mesorah from their teachers; and on very strong halachic, social, and other reasons if they are going to deviate from current and recent practice – see Rama to CM 25:1). However, just because LWMO shouldn’t be kicked out of the machaneh, so to speak, does not mean the rest of us should remain silent when they do innovate (rabbah, woman leading kabbolas shabbos, she’asani isha, ect.), even though their innovations are based on the halachic process. They innovate, justifying their practices in halacha, and others in the MO camp should agree or vehemently disagree as they see fit, also based on halachic reasoning.
The result will be – as it should be – a shakla v’taryah in p’sak, and the result of the debate will only be seen in how halachic practice will have changed in a hundred years, as it has changed over the hundreds of years past. R. Broyde doesn’t say it, but I would add that there is a degree of siyata d’shmaya here in how these halachic debates turn out over many, many years.
Bottom line, as long as the LWMO recognize the need to operate within the constraints of the halachic process, they remain orthodox. But the fact that they remain orthodox does not mean their halacha-based innovations should not be argued with and countered with halachic arguments upholding current practice.