Beyond all that, I'm sure that the internal culture at Cryptic changes the views of those who go work there. Think about it for a minute, they expect their players to be little hamsters and do ever increasing grinds for shinies they still have to pay for! Grinds I'm sure most of them wouldn't even dream of touching. How little must they think of their players! Maybe it wasn't always like that, but I'm sure PWI sent a nice speaker, or group of speakers or trainers that changed their views on what the players are and how the worst aspects of F2P are perfectly justifiable. Or at least made it clear to them how things were going to be from now on and that they had better adapt. After all, they're willing to pay right? No one is "holding a gun to their heads to make them open up their wallets for Zen" right?
A comment on this.
First of all, the internal culture changes the views of those who work there - I am sure of this. However, the thing is, I've been involved in some projects where something similar happened (volunteer, no money involved, just time and love for the project). Those on the "outside" had a drastically different view from those on the "inside" and for things to work many things needed to be kept from those outside. This caused a rift between those inside and outside and made it look like insiders were occasionally making nuts decisions. In fact I have had people comment to /me/ that things I did for it looked strange on the outside but made perfect sense once inside.
Is this the same situation? Probably, to some extent. Is it RIGHT Cryptic is not transparent? Maybe, maybe not, but it's probably a functional necessity from both a business perspective (not every business posts everything about it to the public, after all, even publicly traded companies limit their information outflow), and a game perspective (the people screaming about changes X Y and Z may not realize that it's causing major problems somewhere non-obvious).
However, given he does work for them, and they keep a roof over his head and whatnot, simple fact of the matter is he could be under orders to keep his mouth shut about certain things. This would probably be one of them. There are almost certainly limits to how much he can talk about. I've noticed when devs speak, they try to be friendly but flat-out ignore certain comments. This is probably because they CANNOT speak about them, no matter how rational the question may be or insane the policy change may be. Plus, frankly, the devs in a lot of cases are probably not the ones calling the shots on monetization issues - that's further up the food chain, at least in a general sense. It could well be the dev negotiated some manager down from something even WORSE because said manager didn't put the pieces together that this might drive away half the players in a couple of weeks.