No they don't but if they get together and say they wanted it removed from the DXCC mixed award
Who is "they"? Are you actually still trying to claim that the majority of DXers disapprove of FT8?
You're full of it if you are.
1. The Clublog data shows that at least half of all QSOs are FT8. I've seen nobody put out a convincing claim that these millions of data points are unrepresentative of overall ham activity. Someone said "well, I'm not in Clublog and many more aren't either, so the data is bent." But then I was able to show that even
non-members of Clublog are in members' logs. In fact, I cited that particular critic
by call sign as being known to Clublog. Showing Clublog isn't representative is a tall order. The problem here is basic: If a Clublog member
uploads a log then everyone that member contacts is in the data. It is just possible that somehow Clublog members are misrepresentative. But that's half of the issue. The question is whether those they work are
also unrepresentative and in what sense. Every QSO in the Clublog data base has a member that worked literally anyone else, member or not.
2. The failure of True Blue shows the minority status of the FT8 haters another way. The self-admitted record is now clear -- defections, defections, defections. The organization is defunct because a lot of hams decided, in the end, to join the future and stop playing King Canute.
Those are pretty powerful indicators that FT8 is, you know,
popular.
The league has its own data -- LOTW, award applications. I've seen not a hint or a peep that they think FT8 is anything other than very popular. They probably would support it
even if it were a significant minority (say, 5 or 10 per cent of all QSOs). But it certainly isn't in the half percent range. Otherwise, they might lean your way.