Sorry to hear that you had a bad experience. As an open source project we get bombarded with pull requests where people have spent time and research to create something without reaching out to us in advance. This means that sometimes the way you are architecting your new feature doesn't fit with the current design or our vision. It means that we will sometimes say the feature needs changing.
We are all volunteers and the last thing we want is to start argueing with every person on the internet. The maintainers would burn out pretty quickly. And that means that if we are looking at 20 PRs a night, we will make mistakes and judge too quickly. Can we look at less PRs and spent more time on each PR? Sure, then people get pissed that it takes too long to get feedback on their PRs. There is no winning for us here and so each maintainer will have to find their balance.
For 9272, Pascal has offered the correct solution: a service switch. Every platform could be sharing code with other platforms given enough configuration parameters. We have made the decision that that is not in our best interest as it means that growing one platform now has to be made compatible with all the other configuration options and it becomes a mess. So create a new platform if your change is changing the core of a platform (like removing the template from a template switch). Your comments after the PR got closed got probably missed.
For 9270, you rebased after the discussion took place and I don't remember if the code was different before. The current change looks fine for me. You've removed your clone so I can't re-open the PR for you, but feel free to open a new PR with those changes and tag me in the PR message.