You have no clue what are you talking about. The official documentation is linked and even quoted above. I'm impressed people can't grasp that simple statement even on this forum.
The old new thing is not very relevant for this discussion, so let's focus on the first, the 'Microsoft Security Servicing Criteria for Windows'.
This document lists when microsoft promises to fix a security vulnerability, and when they will pay out a bounty. No more, no less. By it's nature, this document is minimalist, and won't promise anything not strictly necesarry. Notice at the bottom of the document a whole list of Defense in depth features (e.g. DEP) falling outside these criteria. As they were implemented, Microsoft clearly does see value in them, even if they won't promise anything about fixing them.
So yes, an admin elevating to system and then kernel has no automatic intent to service in their security vision and is not bounty eligible.
But nothing of all this conflicts with anything in the post above. I presume microsoft will fix DRM problems. They will make life hard for people running things inside the kernel with no signature. They will annoy you if you pirate windows. None if these fall under the scope of the document.
Compare it to the current edge/bing situation. An admin can remove them from the system. But a next patch will ressurect them. Microsoft will wear you down, even if they made a promise about it.
> Thanks for your kind words.
You get what you deserve for unapologetically repeating false statements already rebutted above in the very same thread with info from the primary source.