In other words, the new mechanic prevents players from just reloading until they succeed (A.K.A. save scumming), therefore it's an improvement.
But is it, really? Consider this: the ability to save scum is an inevitable side effect of an integral aspect of BG's gameplay (you can save/load whenever, except when in combat). There's no way to prevent it altogether unless through a radical design change such as replacing the save-whenever system with a checkpoint or auto-save-only system.
Granted, it doesn't have to be a slippery slope. Perhaps only partially eliminating save scumming is already an improvement. Hell, maybe they should take it further - no more rolling to learn a spell from a scroll, since you can just reload and try again (or save time and give yourself a 25 in INT).
I don't agree with that, however. I come from the point of view that BD shouldn't fix that which isn't broken, and I wouldn't say a mechanic is broken just because it allows for save scumming, which harkens back to the beginning of my argument.
Far from me to deny that the way he put his argument is at best, obnoxious and at worst, incoherent.
My answer, however, is different from yours - I wish Beamdog had been a lot more conservative and focused on preserving rather than changing the BG games, and I would love if there were more ways to bring the EEs closer to the originals while maintaining certain technical improvements. As I said earlier, a best-of-both-worlds version.
Of course, I'm not saying that my opinion is worth more than yours. The only thing I had a problem with was your caricature of EE-naysayers as irrational neckbeards, something I see as reductionist on a topic that has a lot of nuance and room for discussion.