I have no idea where this comes from and my experience as GHCup maintainer indicates the opposite is true: people long for less releases, but more high quality and with less breakage.
My guess would be that people mostly long for high quality and less breakage, and the release cadence primarily affects how salient those things are.
My impression from the rest of the industry is that the usual belief is that you can’t get better quality and less breakage by releasing less often. If you have a process that allows you to produce low quality releases with lots of breakage, then slow releases will just accumulate large amounts of quality issues and breakage. Whereas if you have a good process, then you can release as often as you like. And pushing for a faster cadence puts pressure on the process, hopefully leading to improvement. As the saying goes “if it hurts, do it more often”.
(Plus, faster releases mean smaller batches, shorter queues, shorter cycle times, faster feedback, etc. etc. Lots of good stuff if you can get it.)
Which is to say, I’m not sure that slower releases would actually help. I think the only thing that will help is continuing to work on making the GHC development and release process produce releases with fewer bugs and less breakage.