Yes, that's unfair, in a way. As we can see from the comments here by ebassi and others, it's frustrating to have to tell people that you're not "the bad guy", that there isn't a "bad guy" per se, that you have no control over what's happened and you'd just like to get on with doing your thing.
But IMO that would be a lot easier to accept if there was any indication by the people supporting the GNOME Foundation here (against the detractors of the GNOME desktop) actually admitted that some of the criticisms that people have are actually genuine. Dismissing everyone who criticises the desktop, or gets confused between the two, as $RANDOM_GUY_ON_THE_INTERNET with entitlement issues just makes you look as bad as them. Worse: because this is what the core GNOME developers seem to have done with everyone who doesn't like what they've done with GNOME 3, dismissing criticism is precisely the wrong attitude to take if the GNOME Foundation wants people to sympathise with them.
Humility on both sides is called for.
Accusing someone else of not being humble enough is a really good way of looking arrogant.
IMO, the best thing that the GNOME Foundation can do here to increase public support for their work is to first acknowledge that the GNOME desktop does have flaws that the user community have pointed out. Or, if the Foundation really does have no control over the desktop, then change your name.
Copyright © 2018, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds