So basically what Galaxy 1.0 was SUPPOSED TO be then?

In my personal opinion here is what they should do:
1.Keep GOG Galaxy separate. "Do their thing". Make it Windows-only (actually I would say it's actually better for Linux users. As one myself I really wouldn't want to use some questionable prioretary "all in one" solution that would be hard to debug / troubleshoot / netfilter / control / rmlimit / etc as well as the fact that having even just FEW launcher APIs using JUST chat and JUST phoning home all at once would create a packet flood. Not to mention that such software could easily mess with local files in covert fashion so sandboxing Windows port instead of using native would be more desired).

Maybe also it would be good if they would remove all GOG branding from it, and even better make it clear that it is a COMPLETELY separate product from GOG.

2.Make "GOG Galaxy Legacy" (or name it whatever else like "GOG Launcher").
With the purpose of it supporting following functionality:
-ability to download offline installers
-ability to SHOW ACTUAL CHECKSUM HASHES for downloaded files (right now it's a bit of a joke of a functionality, quite frankly, it basically doesn't exist as of now)
-should be TOTALLY modular with ability to disable EVERY functionality
-optional ability to support achievements offline, with achievement data sent in batches AFTER game session is ended (NOT in data stream during game session), as trimmed down communication with servers as possible
-ability to entirely install everything offline regardless of ALL circumstances
-should be as lightweight as possible, minimal footprint, no electron
-no phoning home
-no store integration
-optional possibility to fire up lightweight chat window
-no reliance on NET, visual studio packages, etc (so easier crossplatform uniformity)
-no reliance on chromium for net, and generation (suggested raw html based app)

It should use Appimage as a distribution way (at least on Linux).

It should be crossplatform (available at least for Linux, Windows) and open source, with something like a GPL or similar license, with repo hosted on Gitlab (NOT Github) or some other place (that is not owned by big predatory corpo like Github now is).

This is my idea of how it should be. I think such approach would satisfy both "target groups" without sacrifising either.
But of course GOG has vast history of not listening to sane community requests so I guess the likelyhood of them doing this exactly like described is astronomically low.

That would be terrible but at this point I can totally see it happening. At least that would open up a huge market niche for anyone who wants to create a truly DRM free game store.

Not to be all "doom and gloom" or whatever, but this is definitely becoming a growing concern in my mind considering how Epic has been recklessly spending Fortnite/Tencent money lately. The one thing that's making me think that it's not likely that Epic will buy CDPR/GOG is the upcoming Cyperpunk 2077 release, but I also acknowledge that it would be bonus points for Epic if they could snag CDPR before the Cyberpunk release so they can make it an Epic exclusive. But of course that's baseless speculation so I really don't know what the real story is. I wish that someone from GOG would make an official statement on their plans.

Why would that be happening in stages though?

I think at this point that is getting carried away too far with speculation. I mean, the real crux of the matter, like I said before, is GOG making a profit on DRMed games, thereby doing what they long loudly proclaimed to be wrong and a blight on the industry. Doing so makes them and their promises to keep to their DRM-free policy and offline installers completely untrustworthy. No one likes to buy from an untrustworthy sotre, to build a collection on an unreliable platform. That is the issue here, and we don't need to speculate about some other phantom menace.

Given Gog's track record it would happen only if Microsoft buys CDProjekt.

I'm not sure I follow. Since when is M$ known for releasing high quality open source cross platform software? (let alone using Appimage)
M$ is NOT pro open source and that's a FACT. What they are doing recently is more of a PR stunt (and is in fact hurting Linux community in a long run).

My point is that this company isn't a great example.
And frankly "given GOG record" I don't know if there is currently any company in the world that COULD make this happen AND would have even the most vague interest in buying GOG someday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-KwYX2u8e4

Precisely my point, it would never happen.
Agree. Gog sells DRM free games (most of them) but I wouldn't trust them more than that. Given how much trackers NoScript reports on this forum, they are as "consumer friendly" as any modern corp. (moderated words since I received a warning of ban)

Sigh. Well. I don't know. One can hope.
But after discovering this thread, GOG has crossed one too many lines for me, and regardless if this whole ordeal is real or not this situation completely shifted my longterm approach.
I am going to backup everything and in longterm (matter of months) stop obtaining anything here (as a matter of a fact I froze any planned purchases at least until I backup everything, and by the time I do things with this ordeal will get more official, but honestly I already don't plan on buying anything anymore here. It's time to abandon ship I guess. Since you know, the captain decided to sink it deliberately).

I see fb, twitter, and google tag manager, there was also some analytics subaddress within gog domain but it doesn't seem to be required for anything GOG to work.
Am I missing something or are these all?

Really? And just what words did you use anyway? You are like the first person I heard of receiving a warning in these forums (do they even have automated words checking system? If so why don't they use it to moderate ACTUALLY harmful stuff that sits on these forums for YEARS?)

Yandex Hotjar and doubleclick, whatever they are... They are blocked and the site seem to work fine but they are there neither the less.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Well they cannot ban you without specifying the EXACT reason.
So useless empty threats from moderators are unlawfull.

Interesting. Well I don't see them and I am 100% sure I see all domains here.
Maybe it depends on geoip (tho it would be weird anyway).
Just a suggestion but maybe check if somebody isn't man-in-the-middle-ing your dns requests (I have seen a hacked router [not mine] in person which resulted in websites getting injected with additional code and connecting to additional places) or redirecting them to their own desired places (I suggest you ALWAYS use your own router in the way, and use secure [that has nothing to do with 443] dns).

edit:
It may also depend on browser settings.
I use Firefox private window with 3rd party cookies disabled and ALL trackers blocked fyi.

Thanks for sugestion. Will have a look at it

I see you have more or less default noscript settings (at least in regards to 1 specific setting).
I would suggest going to settings and changing " List full addresses in the permissions popup (https://www.noscript.net) " in "Appearance " to enabled. That way you can control per subaddress and that's much better (noscript is much more useful this way).

By the way. Do you know of a way to download past builds of GOG games? Through web interface there doesn't seem to be any place for it.

I wouldn't bother. Yandex, Hotjar and Doubleclick have been on GOG for years now.