A bunch of "old school" kit builders are nay-saying a legitimate point here, I think some of you are missing it.
Assuming the kit is going to be all plug-and-play if you choose to build it "their way", then there aren't options to research. There aren't too many choices for them to maintain expertise on. There is the standard "plug-and-play" set up, and it is all supposed to work. This is part of the appeal, at least to some, that might otherwise have been leary of jumping into the kit building world.
So, I actually agree with the OP - in this case, they really should have on-call experts to support their kits with all kinds of expertise.
When I started, I wasn't concerned about building the airframe. I can build anything. But I had never done any firewall forward work, and I was very concerned about how to get info on what good custom and practice, good features and approaches. I did the research, and I enjoyed it. But I can understand how many folks might never decide to build, just because they don't know how to do stuff like wiring and FWF installation.
To an extent, those folks are the target market for the new kits. Us old-school guys are happy and comfortable rolling our own (and I count myself among those now that I've done it once and will do it again).
So it seems to me that us old-school folks shouldn't really be responding with "the customer service is fine the way it is, you are asking too much", because it is fine for us, but may not be for the new builders.
And as I said at the beginning, if you are going to market a bunch of plug-and-play assemblies, they better fit together and work. It's like, we want a Mac, not a DOS machine
As far as revision blocks on drawings, my RV-8 drawings have those. So I expect that all Van's drawings do. But the problem with paper drawings is that just because you can see the revision level of your drawing, you don't know that it is the current revision level. In the past, it has been trusted that it is the appropriate revision level for YOUR kit. But that may no longer be the case. It does seem like a good addition to their website, in the same section as the service bulletins, to have a drawing index with the "current" revision level of each drawing.