Although I don't know if many/most of the lurkers have waded all the way through the current version of the FAQ, some of them may believe they need to read all of the sequences before they post because the FAQ says they do. In fact, the FAQ suggests reading the sequences before even reading Less Wrong:

Do I have to read the sequences before reading Less Wrong?

We can't force you, but it would be by far the best use of your time.

Do I have to read the sequences before posting on Less Wrong?

Again, we can't force you, but if your post involves topics that were already covered in the sequences, or makes mistakes that were warned against in the sequences, you'll probably be downvoted and directed to the sequence in question.

This is a pretty high barrier to entry. I agree that we should encourage reading the sequences, but should we phrase it in another way so that we still welcome participation?

Maybe there is a way for new readers to ask for advice on what particular portions of the sequences would be most helpful for them to read in order to be able to contribute good comments/posts in their particular areas of interest.

edit: the FAQ is undergoing revisions as I write, and the language in the current version is somewhat more welcoming. But it's still worth discussing how high we should set the barrier to entry.