Hi Doug,
Do you want a "Devils Advocate" here? All I can think of is a minor nit-picky objection:
"Genea" is a noun. Nouns are not critical or complementary in and of themselves unless that is already part of their definition. For example, if I were to say:
"Doug is a saint" -- I've complimented you
"Doug is a thief" --I've insulted you
"Doug is a man" --I've simply made a nominitive statement of fact because, "Man" is a neutral noun.
Now we could turn this last example into either a compliment or a criticism by inserting an adjective between 'a' and 'man,' (e.g. "Doug is a good man" -- "Doug is a bad man") but the compliment/criticism is coming from the adjective and would not justify any kind of inductive conclusion about the way the noun, 'Man" would normaly be used.
Similarly, "Genea" is also a pretty neutral noun insofar as there is nothing built into it's definition that would necessarily be either complimentary or critical
For example, at Luke 11:29, Jesus said:
"He genea aute ponera estin" (This is an evil generation)
This sentence can just as easily be turned into a compliment by changing out the adjective:
"He genea aute kale estin." (This is a good generation)
So when you ask, "Did Jesus use the term "this generation" as a compliment? I think a JW could probably object because it sounds like a case is being laid for an esoteric vocabulary unique to Jesus.
What I understand you to be saying is that Jesus never complimented that generation, which is a slightly different wording than your question, but does not detract from the thrust of your paper.