Having read the post, I don't see the appeal of the idea at all. I don't get what it adds. I don't get why anyone would want it. I find leaderboards in noncompetitive games to be stupid, and the entire thing seems like a waste of time, money, resources, and effort that could be better spent making the game fun. To me, it's the equivalent of asking Bethesda to provide everyone who buys Fallout 4 with a pumpkin, because then they can have a pumpkin when they play Fallout 4, and all the fun that comes with playing Fallout 4 while having a pumpkin.
Actually, upon reflection, getting a pumpkin with Fallout 4 would be preferable to me. At least that has some kind of use and value as opposed to the worthlessness that comes from seeing that smallHANDSnobutt8392 is currently ranked 49 in terms of bottle caps.
Personally, I find achievements to be a huge detriment to video games. For one thing, they put an end to a lot of the fun little cheat codes developers used to sneak into games for giggles. But for another thing, it turned playing noncompetitive games into contests, allowing people to brag and go "I played the game better than you!" because they went out of their way to do something not fun. It's the developer "grading" you, implying you played wrong if you didn't get all the achievements because your percentage is lower. And for what? A little icon? Time was you were rewarded for accomplishing things in a game with a reward in game, or you did stupid things like climb to the top of the world and throw yourself off it for you. Because you were trying to find outside the box ways of amusing yourself. Now, those things have become standard achievements, standardizing the experience and removing the organic and fun elements of it.