There's merit to the criticism. Calling people "whiny" or "narcissistic" (what?), is a bit personal and agrressive, considering the alternative, which is talking about this with some manners and a bit of an open mind, regardless of what side you fall on.

It's very simple: The game is early access. By definition, this means the game is considered "unfinished".

Releasing a dlc for a game considered "unfinished" means they have now set a new standard which would allow them to release all new content as dlc.

Not that they will, but that is not the point.

This perception has nothing to do with a "frenzy". That's just a way to delude very real, very calm concerns about this business model. What exactly prevents any other EA game from doing the same?

If they think this is okay, then they should simply take the game out of early access. I mean, if people like you believe it's good enough as-is to now start charging for new content, why keep the EA title?

That's because it's finished enough to have DLC, but not finished enough to be criticized as a finished game.

And what does how many hours you've played have to do with the point at hand? SO, because some people have thousands of hours in the game, it makes this a business model okay?

You're perception of this is too personal, and makes this "center of the universe" thing a bit hypocritical.

You're not considering those who bought it a week ago (for example). Nor have you considered people who buy early access games simply to help progression, and have no intention of playing them until they're considered full releases. Like your Star Citizen example.

tl;dr if they get rid of the "early access" title, I will be more than okay with dlc. Keeping it labeled EA, but progressing as if it isn't, is not okay in my book.