Darius is within 1% of 50% for the first time in years.

https://na.op.gg/champion/darius/statistics/top

But op.gg only uses Platinum+ players, which is only around 11% of ranked players according to http://www.leagueofgraphs.com/rankings/rank-distribution.

Due to the low-skill-high-reward nature of the champion's mechanics, he's much more suited to stomping out the other 89% of players.

He does not have the complexity to give the kind of reward he does. Champions that are successful at high levels of skill should rightfully be the more difficult champions to play well. All Darius has is that he's the top of the raw stat sub class, and that makes him a viable pick.

But Riot's duty to balance the game for high-skill competitive players should not overshadow their duty to balance the game for all players. The power niche that Darius fills is one that he and he alone occupies. That is, he's only reliably beaten when counter-picked, while he's even more likely to win against champions he outclasses than his counters are to beat him. And likewise, if he wins lane he has damage that cannot be defended against and healing that by its nature counters heal mitigation. While he falls off completely if the enemy team picked against him.

It's no coincidence his ban rate shot up when the 10 ban system was introduced. Before, it was high priority picks who absolutely needed to be banned because they were the strong ones per-patch. But since he's been oppressing far longer, albeit at a lesser strength, the new system opened up the ability for people to ban him as well.

So no, it's not stupid for the community to complain about a champion who has been an issue for the vast majority of players for years. What's stupid is thinking that the company has incentive to allow Darius to exist when a vastly greater proportion of potential customers dislike his strength.