The way I see this is that the *BSDs simply don't have the staffing to do all the things, so they say a more explicit "no" more often.

And if you do fewer things, you can perfect those things.

Like look at the history of the big kernel lock in BSDs and Linux. Actually just look at SMP support. OpenBSD was actually very late to the SMP game, because they said "no" to these multiprocessor machines. It wasn't until consumer CPUs got multicore on a die that their hand was forced and it was no longer feasible to say "no".

Or Wayland (or really, any alternative to X). X is fundamentally broken for many reasons (security, screen tearing, input handling, …), but it seems that OpenBSD simply doesn't have the staffing to do this yet.

OpenBSD will say "no" to shitty drivers, or closed source drivers. You know what you get. That wifi card you want to use may just plain be a "no" from OpenBSD.

Do less, but do it right (or their opinion of "right").

Neither approach is right or wrong.