No need to apologize for your opinion.
The good thing about weekly updates is, that you don't have to check them every week. Since they are all named similarly (weekly update #) you can easily read up whenever you have time. by doing a quick forum search. Reading through a months worth of updates takes around 5 minutes on average for me. Dunno how long it takes you, but I find 5 minutes to be bearable.
I prefer no ETA, mainly because in my personal experience, it was the "better experience" to have a game just released in a short window of time from announcing (aka announcing the eta when the game is done), than having an ETA from months/years ago, just to then get disappointed.
Then again, I am also used waiting years for games that I care about to even get a confirmation for a sequel or not, so I am used to enjoy information when it is made available without the expectation of it getting available at a future point in time (which giving an ETA is).
On a sidenote, judging by our local sc thread, I find it highly unlikely, that there is nothing but positive feedback on CIGs updates. I think It is probably a case of selective perception, where all critical voices (no matter how small their critic is) are ignored/devalued/defamed by the user fanbase to give the illusion of unanimous positivity by the 'real' userbase (and to justify the usage of devaluing wording to describe those critical voices). But I digress, this topic is about ETA's.
@Tjafaas btw Dayz had multiple ETA's going on, from the first hinted by Dean Hall himself to be around the end of 2012 (the early access version then took until december 2013 to be released... oopsiedaisy) to another one by Bohemia Interactive with a scheduled release of the beta of the game in Q4 2015 ... According to steam, the game is still in alpha.