Not everything is or even can be covered with an NDA. A simple "we had our issues with the company'" is certainly not covered as long as they don't mention any specifics. There are other laws, you know? Those that are much higher than any NDA or business contract.
Great idea. While you are on it also ask them about the option to change reviews they did such a great job listening to this complaint ;)

All i'm saying is that people shouldn't leap to conclusions just because a dev keeps quiet.

Eh, I have a good average with some staffers so might as well try.

But that was not what you said. The question was, WHY the devs did not say anything and you pointed to a possible NDA as being the reason "why". I simply said that it is really unlikely that an NDA is the reason to stay completely quiet. So if you don't have additional reasons as to why the devs might have kept quiet if they do in fact have problems with GOG (which right now is as unproven as the opposite) the question "Why didn't they say anything?" is still being valid and no jumping to conclusion at all.

so is this a loss or not?

How is it I only see these after the delisting? Where was the thread hiding when I could have used the info?

Win: gamedev / publisher (their decision, save upkeep costs / reduce opportunity cost)

Lose: GOG (lose revenue stream, increasing delisting stats), people who already bought the game (zero hope in getting updates and stuck with an incomplete game), and people interested in the game and collectors (opportunity loss of ownership)

Not affected: everyone else

so no future dlc-s ? that's bad for the owners :(
wish dlc-s were multiplatform, imho it should be even guaranteed by the law, if you have the base product the add-ons should work no matter where you buy them from

For those confused:

The game was delisted because they stopped developing for the GOG version. With the release of their newest DLC Expansion Pack they did not update the GOG version of the game leaving it in a previous version, unable to play with non-GOG copies. They also did not release the DLC on GOG, so there was no way to remedy the situation. The game was either removed under agreement with GOG, or as a direct consequence of abandoning support. The publisher and developers have not released a statement on why this has happened.

Everything else is speculation.

It was "hiding" in the pinned section, where, ironically, it is harder to spot. That's GOG forum software for you.

This should already be in the legal contract between GOG and the gamedev / publisher. I'd be quite surprised if it wasn't.

To mitigate these issues, the most obvious solutions are to make their backend as smooth as butter or add in [heavier] penalty clauses if we're not getting reasonably timed updates as other platforms (policed by vigilant users). The latter option is less preferable, but would also make sure all parties' expectations are on the same page when they do decide to put their games on here.

Ugh. I never notice an extra thread in the stickies, hard to notice the forest is one tree bigger. The normal threads - I actually look at those and see the new topic.

It would make more sense to post it as a news thread. There are too many stickies for an extra one to stand out. Any chance these could be news threads rather than just stickies? There are so many stickies already that I never see these delisting threads until they stop being sticky, by which point it's too late. I used to see them no problem before they started being stickied...

Common, you know better. This makes GOG look bad, so it's not going to be on the front page.

Is it impossible to make a Blue Dot post in the forum without a front page news article? Perhaps it is, this is GOG after all.

p.s. I think the word(s) you were looking for were "Come on"?

Not zero hope. The Long Dark was de-listed long ago and still gets updates; mostly recently 1.94 less than a month ago, on April 29. They even provide patch notes, which seems less common these days.