I don't think the point was that if, as beginner, you don't get hands-on time with the instructor every class then he is a bad teacher. ... At a certain point, though, direct hands-on access to the teacher becomes essential. I think the original post was addressing the larger issue of whether a teacher takes an active and ongoing role in each student's development via regular hands-on contact, not whether a teacher touches hands with one particular student during one particular class.
I do not disagree. The best instructors I have had see a problem, step in to verify they feel the problem that they see, and then replay the problem and the solution(s) back, physically, for either or both sides of the training. That what I have copied as my model, anyway.
I would say that the ideal instructor has perception, patience and puissance. "Puissance" (even though it may be considered hi-falutin') is a better word than "Power." Even though they come from the same root "pouvoir" -- "to be able" -- puissance just implies capability to perform in a highly effective way, but without the connotation of force or physical strength involved in "power."
That said: this should be borne in mind:
"The instructor can only impart a small portion of the teaching. Only through ceaseless training can you obtain the necessary experience to bring these mysteries alive." Morihei Ueshiba, Precautions for Aikido Training