Upon request, I have snipped some of my quotes, and cleaned this up a little.
That is not true. It is perfectly possible (and easy) to hide biases, when a bias is not called for, nor adds anything to the discussion. If this were a thread specifically about Gone Home or Hatoful boyfriend, then fine, include your subjective views and personal biases. But as you yourself have stated, that is not the point of this thread. It's a thread discussing GOG's policies on acceptance/rejection of games and being transparent about it.

And it's only ingenuine if you're withholding useful information in order to help your case, or are lying. Not including something that serves no purpose overall, and is potentially offensive is fine. If someone had a bad haircut, is there much point in telling them, if it doesn't really achieve anything and will only upset them?

Let's look at your original thread, shall we? Tell me, why did you need to add the part about Gone Home or Hatoful Boyfriend? How did it help you in anyway. You had a perfectly good post up until that. Even this part: "Please bare in mind this is only my subjective opinion, but I'm deeply troubled by a lot of the events that have happened over the past few mouths. After losing Nordic and Frictional Games I was hopping that Wrack and Retrovirus would breath some new life into GOG's library and fill some of the void lost by so many good FPS such as Painkiller and Red Faction."
Those are fine statements and I'd be inclined to actually agree with you.

But then you have to throw in:
" Instead we get games like, Hatoful Boyfriend, Gone Home and Daikatana. At least Daikatana is a game though.

I don't want to play Gone Home or some visual novel about pidgin shagging. I want to play good game, old fashion games."

Again, was this really called for?
On the offset, you make negative implications about the games, but okay... it was one post. Fine...

The bigger problem is that when anyone stated an interest or liking of the games, you basically attacked them and told them why a game they liked isn't good:
"Wow I must be like a million years old because in my day, games were about fun."
"I've played Gone Home. New and different doesn't good though"
"Except ones that are fun that is."
"It's not a decision it's just common sense."
"Why is a visual novel about fucking birds so damn popular. Look even if it was the next Lord of the Rings. IT'S NOT A GAME PEOPLE!"

I'm sure you didn't intend it, but basically every step of the way you've been insulting those who do like these games.
I don't mind if you dislike the games, but I do have a problem when you seem to be actively attacking those who do like them!

People came here to post their opinions on your original question, not to be told that their games "aren't fun", that "it's common sense" that they're bad, and even that the titles "aren't even games".
So no. It's not my problem. The fact that others have expressed their dissatisfaction with your posts (albeit less vitriolic than me) should be proof enough.
And yes, you have been targeted. While I do apologise for being so aggressive, you have to realise that when you insult someone, or something they like, they'll likely fight back. In your case, you've managed to annoy multiple people with your derogatory statements, so it's no surprise that you've been targetted, really.

I understand perfectly what you’ve been trying to say, but the way you present yourself and your points is poor. Again, you may well not have intended it, but you’ve taken an aggressive stance against GOG, coming across as though you’re blaming them for everything. The devs/pubs however - you seem to simply take their word and not place any blame on them, when more often than not, situations like these are always double-sided.

Let’s look at some of the things you posted in regards to this:
"WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON AT GOG"
"I'm suspicious that they are picking and choosing based on what someone on the inside personally likes.
This isn't good. No I have to question if a game on the wish list can't be obtained, or if someone just doesn't like it."
"GOG rejected Braid!? WTF! I'm not even into Braid but there's no way that game would not bring in lots of dosh. Do you hate money GOG. It's like they have the means to actually compete with Steam but are choosing not to."
"They also denied Braid. I don't even like Braid, but I think that's insane, as if that game wouldn't sell like pancakes on a site such as this. "

People have given you plenty of reasoning behind GOGs decisions. We've even suggested that the primary reason GOG cannot be transparent or offer more info is due to legal isses... and yet you continue to call it 'mere speculation', discount it offhand, or ignore it completely.
I guess they could simply respond with 'we can't reveal any info about why we rejected a game due to legal issues', but would that really satisfy you? Especially considering that you pretty much already know that.