Spot on. SOS rely on very traditional, simplistic and limited strategies to communicate their arguments and aims, and, in doing so, they deliberately bypass any actual, open and public channels for such concerns. Now, unless you're a relativist who stupidly thinks that freedom fighting and terrorism (for example) are essentially the same thing but just with positive and negative names, you need to acknowledge, boring and unflashy though it is, that you first need to use the formal means of communication and see how real and willing the people who offer it are. Only then, if you find it a sham, do you resort to Fred Kite-lite activism. SOS are always going to help get certain things changed (although, as much as they like to claim all the credit, it's never just them), but that doesn't mean that by opposing their illegitimate claims to speak for the fans in general, and their dubious and ill-thought-out tactics, one is taking a 'sly pop' at them. It's an overt pop, thank you very much.
When FSG came in they made much of their willingness to give the fans a voice and to listen and act on their concerns. No matter how sceptical one might have been about that, there was a need to take them up on the offer and challenge them to turn words into deeds. SOS, on that basis, should have seized on that offer, given their supposedly simple and noble idea to help the fans as a whole. But they didn't. They cared more about being SOS than communicating with the club. Working with the club, or trying to, would have seen them absorbed back into the fanbase, with their separate identity erased, and they hated that thought.
So they don't deserve the prominence that they demand for themselves and their actions, let alone the self-serving mythology that they promote.
