That isn't the same thing as you clearly know... Paying to have things privacy infringing settings disabled and donating and then having to disable said privacy infringing settings are very different things.
I am somewhat sympathetic to your point, but do feel it is overstated in this case. It would be one thing if there was some indication of ill intent. From all I've seen, I just don't see it as an attempt at being deceptive. Marginally useful? Sure. Trying to trick people into thinking their computer isn't sending data back? This is akin to hating cell phone providers for creating tracking data on you. It is rather obvious that the data has to have been sent across the wire.
