I think the vitriol is a result of people correctly identifying, if not always fully articulating, that Saylor frequently talks out of both sides of his mouth. 

In a few short years has he gone from saying "tax that!" to essentially condemning self-custody, cryptoanarchy, and anyone with an adversarial mindset vis a vis the state. 

There is more than a whiff Elon Musk-esque carnival barker-y in Saylor. He reeks of inauthenticity and a lack of any deeply held values. He seems willing to change his views on a dime, with no acknowledgement, based on what he sees as being in his economic interest at that moment. 

This isn't a case of Bitcoin's overactive social immune system. The pushback against Saylor is warranted and healthy, in my view. He wields a lot of influence, and has the potential to do a great deal of harm even as he helps pump the price. I would argue his position as an ossificationist has already done significant damage. And his opposition to self-custody and bitcoin's more revolutionary potential could do even more (btw, notice that his opposition to further protocol changes and self-custody are entirely consistent). 

Just my 2sats. I'd be curious to hear if anyone disagrees.

nostr:note1tltthmmk8vr08fj3jyaqfakdu9rpsmyfn0hsaht9yhv0z6lta7msgxlc4c