now you are mis-stating the position of the kernel developers.
yes, they are opposed to people releasing exploits against released kernels.
that is because they recognise that it's frequently not trivial for people to change their kernels, so by releasing exploits you are doing the bad guys work for them.
and I don't believe that they deliberately downplay a known exploitable scenerio by classifying it as a DOS, I do believe that they fix many bugs that they believe are only a DOS at the time they fix them that are later determined to be exploitable.
Brad believes that every fix should be examined and it's security impact determined prior to the fix being submitted (that's the only way the commit message could explain the severity of the bug being fixed)
the kernel developers are more interested in fixing more bugs (and probably introducing a few with the new changes) as a better use of their time.
the kernel developers also fear that if they do start categorizing bugs as 'security' fixes or not, it will be worse in the long run because the fixes that are not classed as security fixes are far less likely to get deployed.