I don't think it makes sense to gatekeep Linux only to those who has time, energy, and dedication to continuously check for necessary interventions and to familiarize themselves with all the terminal utilities in the first place.

That is a sort of elitism we need to carefully avoid - one, because otherwise it would halven the desktop Linux community, and two, because there's a huge group of people out there who need what Linux offers, but cannot dedicate themselves to it in the way enthusiasts do.

For them, there must be an option to push the button and get a smooth update, with everything resolved automatically or prompted in a user-friendly way. Arch is not that.

You feel comfy doing this - alright, no one stops you, Arch is great and has a purpose. But we should never put blame on users for not using their system The Arch Way™, because it's too technical, too engaged, and is just a poor fit for most. People will not and should not accommodate for this just to use their system. There's no need to.

If someone chose Arch and complains that it breaks things, it could be useful to point out Arch doesn't have required guardrails to make it operable in a way they expect, and direct the user to other distributions that have them and potentially least painful ways to migrate.

Having tried Arch and its derivatives, and recognizing their strong points, I can absolutely tell the person needs another distribution, and that's alright! Whatever fits anybody is up to them. And for stable rolling release experience without the need for manual checking (but also without some of the power features of Arch mainly geared toward enthusiasts) there's OpenSUSE Tumbleweed.

Edit: Tone.