Then I wonder why you purchased 4e, from WotC, considering the behavior on their boards (i.e. "people associated with" WotC, using your words).
A rather interesting position of yours.
Duplicates my thought, and I am not particularly a "fan" of Pathfinder (recently being far more interested in Basic Fantasy and 3.5 as-is). When folks were (understandably) upset about shennanigans with WotC (including claiming that rumours the 4e announcement was close were false, cancellation of Dungeon & Dragon, broken promises about tiered licensing, broken promises about the DDI (when, and what it could do), and problems with the GSL, a lot of folks said, in effect "I'll buy or not buy 4e based on the
game, not based on how I feel about WotC."
Now, I would agree with choosing to spend your dollars based on what you want to encourage the company to
do, or what you want to encourage the company to
produce, but a little consistency would be nice.
(Of course, I am also inconsistent here, because I recognize that what WotC
does is more important to the market/industry/hobby as a whole than what most/any/all 3pps do. What WotC does impacts me; what a 3pp does, except in the case of what they produce, or in the case where they champion something of use to the market/industry/hobby....like Clark with the GSL and the APG....really doesn't affect me much.)
(Never hurts for a 3pp to be professional, though.

)
RC