I think it might be wise to step out of the echo chamber on this one. These sorts of "rules controversies" are exactly the sort of thing that turns off the casual fan and hurts the perception of the game. That said, I think a lot of the prior posts misstate the standard from Decision 34-3/10. A player simply is not required to put the ball back exactly in the same spot. In fact, the point of the Decision is precisely to abandon that approach. Rather, a player is required to use reasonable judgment to try and put the ball back in the same spot and it has to pass the "naked eye" test. Everyone agrees the ball is millimeters from where it was when marked. The rule was applied correctly.
I think a lot of the prior posts also miss a key part of the animating spirit of the Decision, which is that it is inherently inequitable to subject certain players to the heightened standard of intense video review when others are not. A player 4 groups ahead could have done the same exact thing, but since there were no cameras on him (or, expressed differently, the images weren't broadcast to hundreds of thousands of "amateur rules officials") the alleged breach would go unnoticed. If you want to talk about protecting the field, then subject everyone to the same level of scrutiny. In some groups, that's a rules official and fellow competitors with their naked eyes. In others, it's the foregoing plus video. Consequently, the Decision tries to level those to inherently different levels of scrutiny by using the "naked eye" standard that is applied in all the non-TV groups. I applaud the USGA and R&A for this welcome change that rids us of the "GOTCHA!" moments that have so plagued the sport because of HD video replay.