Except there is a relationship.
That (and your analogies) generalizes specifics and isn't valid. There can be
a relationship, but there is never necessarily
a relationship. For your logic to be valid the specific must always apply in an exclusive manner.
Firstly and most importantly, anonymity online tends to favoured by those who like to stir/talk gibberish.
But what "tends" to be is, by definition, not necessarily so. It isn't valid to assume there is always the relationship you state.
A person's ability to explain the technical issues in photography has virtually nothing at all to do with what their preferences are in art. Objective technical issues are not a matter of opinion, preferences in art are always a very subjective personal opinion. A photo gallery just demonstrates a set of preferences...
The fact that any given photographer's choice of genre and/or style happens to be popular or pleasing to many does not relate to that same photographer's knowledge about or ability to explain or even just discuss technical issues.
Examples are many... RSL takes nice photographs, and has a very distinct style, yet claims there is no such thing as his style and supports that by claiming Ansel Adams had no style. We know exactly who he is, we can look at his images, and yet he is clearly posting gibberish. Your whole theory is shot down with just one reality check!
The rest of your article has the same logical fallacy embedded in each part of the discussion. I did write, but then deleted as excessive, a detailed response. Basically your specific observations are correct, but they don't have the vast general application you assume.
Specifically the analogies don't prove your points. Analogies are great to help people learn and gain perspective, but they are never evidence to prove a point. You aren't writing a tutorial and your analogies are virtually all invalid in the context of this thread.
If there is one specific part of that which you believe is both valid and significant enough to warrent a discussion, point it out and I'll go into detail on just that item.