The whole point is the freedom of choice. I don’t use Arch because it’s “one of the hardest most customisable distros”, but because it’s rolling release, I like pacman as a package manager, and the AUR is a great resource. I used Ubuntu with bspwm and Arch with Gnome, and there’s nothing wrong with either of those setups. It’s all Linux in the end. Most of the differences between distros (for most “traditional” distros, at least) boil down to the install process, the init system, a set of default configurations/packages, and the package manager.

Don’t play gatekeepers, please. It’s dumb, nobody asked you to do it, your opinion is just that, and it’s exactly this type of community behavior that turns people away from Linux. Thanks.

Kinda weird to categorize distros into difficulty levels especially when they’re not particularly difficult.

Arch isn’t difficult. Yes, the TTY is a little daunting, but if you know your way around making partition and mounting them, then you’re good to go. Gentoo, Slackware, NixOS and Guix are harder to setup, especially with NixOS and Guix you need to know the language as well.

Every distro that isn’t immutable is customisable, that’s the nature of Linux. For example don’t like cinnamon on mint? You can install another DE. Arch alone isn’t customisable in of itself, Linux is.