"If 3.0 is really 2.10 why not call it 2.10 and leave 3.0 for a version that will bring a jump like what 2.0 did?"
A good idea, but this was probably in the plan when v2.0 was released. Essentially, the current version plan can actually monster the devs. Having full version support then it is downgraded to security support only then no support comes much too quickly, I suspect. With the models above, it really makes it more desirable to just stick with the LTS versions, as long as people which versions they are.
Above, Visvanath makes the comment that suggests academia is slow to adapt, but I am not sure if that is correct, more likely funding is the issue here. Why the commercial sector would want 2 versions a year is beyond me. I would suggest they would prefer a longer cycle, as long as they get regular updates. It's like being on the edge of a wave, and you can either stay there, or you can get swamped too easily. Most organizations IT guys are already overworked, well, those I have seen anyway and those who use Moodle is one of the reasons they are. Funnily enough, one guy I spoke to told me he was really looking forward to having new versions every few months or so, is now saying they have backed off it, and are only going to upgrade once a year. Just got too much for them.
Another problem I have seen is one of the organizations I have been dealing with has parts of it on v2.7, others are on v2.8. No idea why they have done this, but I have the feeling it is going to get seriously messy if they don't remedy it. (I have not been able to talk to the network manager so have no explanation for how this happened or why, it was only by luck that I noticed it.)