I rather suspect that it depends greatly on the motives people have for writing articles in the first place. I've written a few for other forums and don't require any feedback, I don't really care what anyone thinks once it has been accepted for publication. That in itself is vindication enough that my drivel is, at least vaguely, coherent and passably readable. I wouldn't expect to write for a magazine and expect a ream of letters about the article. I've also never felt compelled to write in about someones articles. That doesn't change because something is on-line.
I'm afraid that I've seen it before on forums where those making a lot of noise have ulterior motives. Some wish to get involved in the tackle industry, the specialist journalism etc etc. Others simply like the attention. Either way, good luck to them. However, there's no reason to berate anyone else for not facilitating someones gratification, whatever their initial motive. If you require a response to an article, wherever it's published, you've got to either pose questions that are interesting or be controversial, challenging or opinionated enough to provoke. (without it being a blatant wind up.)