Even if that's the case, aren't those supposed to be "ok" motivations?
A lot of the point of giving people credit is to encourage further contributions. And people only fixing problems that affect them is a very common starting point for people becoming contributors.
From what I've read, the majority of kernel contributors get paid by their employers, that is, they fix things that affect them.
And, I'm guessing that getting credited for their work is important to them too, for career reasons if nothing else.
This seems a bit weird to me. Not the contribution-without-credit thing on your part, but the trying to denigrate the article authors contribution because their motivations were different from yours. Even though their motivations were just as valid as yours. :)
It does exist, but unfortunately people who practice it are not believed by those who do not, because they cannot fathom it.