While I can't say that he deserves personal attacks on him, I can't find fault in people laying down heavy criticism on him and his editorial style (if he has any).

It's true that he doesn't want Spider-man to fail... however, that does not mean that telling a good story is ever his first priority. There are plenty of business men who will gut a product in order to sell more of it in the short term, as that's the only way they know how to do things. They're not looking to fail, they just don't equate a quality product with success... it's only a nice bonus, if possible, not something that's absolutely necessary. You yourself suggest that getting people talking about the story was a goal... I'd agree, and from what I've seen of Quesada, that's the highest goal he tends to have in mind. Over and over again they put out major "event" comics that have tortured plot twists and shocking moments that don't necessarily make for good stories, but certainly make for waves in fandom.

The early vibe I got from the Jemas/Quesada combo was a motto that "no attention is bad attention", and the lesson Quesada seems to have taken from his mentor is that negative reaction is the easist attention to get.

More to the point on this current Spidey thing, I think it's quite possible that Quesada was more than willing to tell a bad story in order to get the books lined up to his liking for the future. That might be acceptable to some, while others would say there's no excuse in not holding off until a *good* story was proposed that would get them where they want to be.