If you were critiquing a painting and you spent half your time describing how the painter is a hyperdouche, it would naturally lead to any listener/reader wondering whether your critique of the painting may be unfairly influenced by your personal opinion of the painter which means your critique would not necessarily even be about the painting, but the painter.

It could or could not be useful information to have, but it is utterly useless when trying to convey whether the painting itself is good or not good.

If your critique is about Uber as a company, with design being an incidental part of that, then getting into the personalities of leadership is appropriate. But if your critique is about the designs employed by the company, then it is inappropriate.

Not against any "rule," but if your audience gets a feeling you'd rather avoid (that your critique is not due to your analysis of the design, but due to your personal opinions of the individual), then it would be pretty stupid to not accept that........ criticism.