I think this is the key. Take this post:
The OP clearly was a berk letting half his neighbourhood know his PIN, but commenters are so incredibly desperate to paint Monzo in a positive light that most of them are not even reading the OP properly.
He’s saying they weren’t very helpful because the chat is crap, which we all know, and that having started off replying quickly, they then just stopped replying, again, something we know happens. He then says Monzo gave him £30, which I’m willing to bet was because of the crappy chat and resulting poor CS, not anything to do with the fraud. If they’re not even going through the motions with regards to the “fraud”, that is poor, but I don’t know if they have to since he’s admitted people knew his PIN or can just say no and leave it there, but most of his post is about how poor the CS was, not that they didn’t give him it all back, only at the very end does he reference that.
The commenters are rounding on him because he was an idiot, which I’m sure he knows at this point, instead of focusing and acknowledging the point he was making because it would portray Monzo in a negative light. They’re two different issues.