I think they're complaining about Sabine making another video where she repeats the same unsubstantiated complaints. And they were disappointed because they are interested in novel critique of particle physics, and were let down.
In what way? Her line of reasoning was easy to follow and she gave some specific examples. Given the length and medium I felt it was substantial, certainly enough for a rebuttal. What's missing?
That funding could go towards thousands of research proposals that aren't suffering from diminishing returns.
This is simply not true, as a quick perusal of any proposal for a future collider will show: they all start with motivational statements, not with "it is a truth universally acknowledged we need another" as you claim.
What you are thinking of is ballistic missile defence, now that's a self-serving boondoggle.
They are pseudo motivations "justified" by appeals to pseudo problems. They are pseudo problems for exactly the reasons Hossenfelder discusses in this video and in her book.
Glad you asked. The Higgs boson was just the thing I needed for my new Tesla and, thanks to LHC, I now always carry a spare in the trunk. But in all honesty it's slightly off-center and I am hoping that a new larger accelerator will provide a particle that precisely fills the bill.
I concur with your last point.
What a weird comment. They're not substantiated at all, the whole video is literally substantiating her position, and does it quite well IMO.