My post was an academic view of the "Alt-Coin Narrative" cycle. Believing that Darkcoin will collapse does not imply that I am a "hater." In fact, I believe Dogecoin will collapse too (due to its quickly dropping mining subsidy) but I actually have a soft spot for the Dogecoin community and I am saddened for the good people losing money (because they invested without understanding Dogecoin's fundamental technical flaws).
Whether those 5 points you posted are true or false no longer really matter. Darkcoin is riding the hype cycle--only hype matters. Darkcoin is perceived as insta-mined. Darkcoin is perceived as closed-source. Darkcoin is perceived as non-innovative. Darkcoin is perceived to have a volatility-enhancing block reward. Darksend is perceived as less advanced that Cryptonote's ring signature approach (Bytecoin, Monero, etc). The fact that you feel the need to argue that this perception doesn't represent reality strengthens my case. When the hype is over, the market will use these as excuses to justify dumping the coins. The market is fickle.
For the record, I don't believe in Monero either. I just think that it may appear to The Market as a more legitimate continuation of the "privacy narrative" that began with Darkcoin.
Thanks for composed answer. Sure bubbles tend to pop and DRK is not an exception. However it does not necessarily mean it would collapse and die completely. With ongoing development I'm sure it will take its niche.
The perception of those points is purely subjective and I doubt that the majority of people who are interested in Darkcoin share your point of view. And I don't understand how my counter-arguments strengthen your position.
I agree market is fickle and the perception of the coin itself would be as you said simply a justification. However this is typical cycle for any new technology which I see as completely expected.