Probably have to hang up that 'advocate' hat, as that person would driven by new primary goals.
Ubuntu regularly takes pot shots at this n that elements of current GNU/Linux ecosystem, do you want to mimic Ubuntu approach in your articles?
Now I'll add some arguments against my original take:
( Some of these tire me just writing them as they are buzzphrases )
- Criticism is essential to development*
- Choice is bad, criticize to weed out all but the one true choice
- Point out the weaknesses in your competition, through heavy criticism and sell more.
- Make unpopular choices on behalf of your users, after all you are the software company, and they merely use your software.
- To get to know a truth properly, one must polemicize it.
Noting the paradox here.
Making good software terrible in a new release (Vista) increases criticism.
I'll leave you to untangle that, and hopefully realise, that it is a more complex idea, than can be properly framed in one sentence.
Perhaps these phrases might help give some balance:
- Criticism because you ignored what the customer wants is rarely good.
- Not all criticism is good criticism
Polemicist point of view: All criticism (of system) is good criticism, as it increases my article audience, and sells ad space.
The '...know a truth properly...' quote is I think from 'The Viking book of aphorisms' by W. H. Auden