Congratulations: We now have opinions on your open source contributions
The argument the author makes seems really nonsensical.  It really comes off as "i would like to have my cake and eat it too".<p>It's true it's not the fault of the author that a thing became popular.
So what?<p>If you don't want the responsibilities of being popular through a given distribution mechanism, then great, don't use that distribution mechanism.<p>Nobody is forcing you.<p>That will cause you to have no responsibility.
It will likely cause your adoption to be lower, but you just argued that it isn't your fault adoption is so high, so presumably you don't care.<p>Otherwise you are arguing that you owe nobody anything, because it's not your fault, but the distribution mechanisms owe <i>you</i> something - free distribution without responsibility!<p>In reality, most people care a lot and want their project to be popular,  so making arguments that "it's not the authors fault it is popular" are generally pretty disingenuous.<p>Whether that is the case here, who knows, but it is pretty hard to be sympathetic to an argument that plays both sides, and claims you owe nobody anything while the distribution mechanisms owe you something.