The issue here is that it cleaves toward designing for the audience you have, as opposed to the audience you seek to appease.

Often, the design goals might exist on an alternate axis.

Random people offering random opinions amounts to random noise. However, the random noise will not appear neutral; it will appear as information.

If we consider many different things designed for particular audience members such as jet cockpits, medical tools, racing automobiles, we will see traits that exist that may seem nonsensical or otherwise when we divorce them from their designed contexts.

Bill Buxton covers this in Sketching User Interfaces when he describes Inuit coastal maps: "The Inuit have used. [...] Tactile maps of the coastline, carved out of wood. They can be carried inside your mittens, so your hands stay warm. They have infinite battery life, and can be read, even in the six months of the year that it is dark. And, if they are accidentally dropped into the water, they float. What you and I might see as a stick, for the Inuit can be an elegant design solution that is appropriate for their particular environment."[1]

Focusing on complaints of the above design in all likelihood would, given the mad rabble of audiences online, result in discarding a solid bit of design.

[1] Bill Buxton, Sketching User Experiences, pg 37