I am simply saying that they act without thinking things through. I'm not expecting 100% accurate knowledge of anything in particular. I am however very critical of: Creating a DAO in a hasty and sloppy manner, misleading people repeatedly about its security, discarding the principle of "code is law" without thinking through the implications there, rushing a soft fork without doing any security analysis (luckily an outsider pointed out its fatal flaw), rushing a hard fork under the most pretentious facade of consensus imaginable, presuming that less than 10% of holders voting in favour of the fork would be perceived as consensus and would get everyone else to fold their tents and go home, and, especially in this article, assuming that they will dictate what the solution is going to be to the difficulty bomb - a solution that rewards large stakeholders like the developers with rewards for doing no work.