The issue isn't so much whether a person can keep an arch install stable, it's whether arch is stable for most people, most of the time.
As modern hardware and DE choices change and conflict, arch has to be manually tweaked to stay working. Those tweaks (aka config choices) are essentially the entire purpose of a normal distro.
Arch isn't designed to do the tweaks. It's just that simple.
Saying you kept arch running is either a brag about how well you manage it, how minimalist your environment is, or how simple your hardware is. Not to mention whether your needs drive you to try any of the edgier stuff.
I would say that Arch's philosophy is about Exposed simplicity vs Hidden complexity. The wiki is extensive and covers a lot of cases one might stumble upon. Sometimes it feels like Arch's goal is to teach you how it works end-to-end. As a byproduct you get a working OS.
As modern hardware and DE choices change and conflict, arch has to be manually tweaked to stay working. Those tweaks (aka config choices) are essentially the entire purpose of a normal distro.
Arch isn't designed to do the tweaks. It's just that simple.
Saying you kept arch running is either a brag about how well you manage it, how minimalist your environment is, or how simple your hardware is. Not to mention whether your needs drive you to try any of the edgier stuff.
Congrats to this guy though.