Which is completely irrelevant as far as talk about the New 52 goes. If you can think of an instance in which a writer was out of line and an editor was unfairly blamed and have the proof to back it up, you're welcome to share it. Otherwise, you seem to be making people sharing stories of their bad experiences and the very real problems under Didio's tenure to be a bunch of unsympathetic liars just because you liked some books made during the New 52.
Since we usually hear only what writers say it is hard to say if editor was justified or not. Its not like some writer is going to say that he was stupid and thats why editors kicked him off. No, its always that he had some great ideas that were shot down by evil editors.
For something that was such a commercial success, it's always intersting how much craziness was happening behind the scenes.
No one is claiming this is unique to Didio or the New 52. They are being talked about here because they are the topic of this particular conversation.
And if we're talking about agendas, would you say that the people acting like there were major issues with the New 52 also don't have agendas?