I don't think it's counterproductive at all and we actually agree in a sense. In a sense, opaque blobs are the default license category. Moving past that, if we can acknowledge that unambiguously (positively-stated) non-proprietary licenses are worth favouring, it is worth differentiating as a means to an end of open hardware.

For example, I would appreciate a "noblob" kernel option. If my system doesn't boot, I may reverse that choice, but I can also (still) hope for, and request, useful information along the way so I can choose the closest to ideal (for me) from the options available.

At some point it becomes a "if you don't like it, submit a patch" scenario, which is fine. It is more likely to lead to that when the response isn't overwhelmingly dismissive or insulting.