Of course, you're right. I know I made some blanket statements, but I found it necessary to simplify everything a bit.

I personally have the feeling you contradict yourself tho. You basically say "Arch is super easy", but then list 100 reasons why it isn't.

As I said in the post, Arch is a fantastic distro, but nothing I would recommend for anyone.
Most people don't use their OS as a nerd hobby (sorry!), but as a means to get their software they need (browser, office, games, etc.) running.

They just want something that works reliably and doesn't get in their way.
They don't care if they use zfs or btrfs as filesystem or run the newest KDE framework.

Needing to check the news page on daily basis, or risking to brick their system otherwise, is a big no-go for most.

Of course, installing it isn't the hardest part.

But maintaining it reasonably is also important, which happens mostly passively on other systems. Turning on the PC and getting greeted by GRUB emergency mode is the worst case for anyone, and would result in installing Windows again for most.

Also, it's very minimalist. For users who already know what they need, that's good.
I don't know if you know the greentext-meme with the Arch-guy who had to share his screen, but couldn't because of his missing component, and then got laughed at and overshadowed by the girl with her Windows laptop.

This "bloat" is what makes a comfortable computing experience for most other people, and needing to google "Arch no sound" and fixing something for two hours is just something not everyone is comfortable and willing with.

That's why I've made the big disclaimer and said it should only be chosen if you're ready for a big learning experience and have the patience for that.