It seems to me that you might have good feedback for them about how to make the idea work, but it was hard to tell amidst the cloud of hatred and vitriol.
OB1 has the best ideas I've seen on how to make it work re: Wild Shape.
The Druid design is remarkable because every single other design change they've made has been conservative and highly compatible with previous editions, including the Paladin right here in the same packet.
Whereas the Druid is overall a massive nerf to a class that was only "about as good" overall as other Full casters (all things considered, assuming equally good subclasses), esp. given they'd already nerfed the dodgiest thing about it (Goodberry), and a huge change to how the class plays in a very real way. Given the Bard and Cleric weren't nerfed in any meaningful ways (just a couple of dodgy spells), and even arguably buffed (Clerics at least), I don't think we can see this as any kind of trend, which otherwise would have been interesting.
It's been pointed out online that the biggest beneficiary of the Druid changes would be the 3D VTT. I know there's supposedly no direct influence between the teams, but the designers aren't idiots, so they'll have some understanding of what will work for it. Doing Wild Shape the 5E way would be something of a nightmare for the 3D VTT (even BG3 has it limited a ton, albeit in slightly confused ways).
I will say I think being mad is a valid reaction to something in a playtest - as long as you tell them! They're not reading our detailed solutions/suggestions (there's literally no way, given the number of surveys), just our numbers - and I know a bunch of people are just mindlessly positive about virtually everything, so the clarity of "I hate this" is helpful. There was a game designer on Twitter actually pointing this out - saying "Don't just quit the playtest when you hate something, tell them! It helps!".