It sounds like the dev's reason for rejecting the issue is that the issue was opened on the documentation repo rather than the code repo.

On the one hand, it's understandable. No amount of documentation changes will fix the issue.

On the other hand, it's a pretty abrasive response. It wouldn't have taken any more effort to be a little more helpful and direct OP to the right repo: "Sorry, this is the wrong place for this to be addressed. Please bring it up here instead [link]."

If you actually read through, the option to disable the functionality was already present… just not documented. So it seems the documentation repo was the correct place to open it