After trying to figure out where the response would be best suited, I'm splitting the difference; I'll put a summary here, and if it's not obviously stupid and seems to garner comments, I'll post the full thing on its own.

I've read some of the sequences, but not all; I started to, and then wandered off. Here are my theories as to why, with brief explanations.

1) The minimum suggested reading is not just long, it's deceptively long.

The quantity by itself is a pretty big hurdle to someone who's only just developing an interest in its topics, and the way the sequences are indexed hides the actual amount of content behind categorized links. This is the wrong direction in which to surprise the would-be reader. And that's just talking about the core sequences.

2) Many of the sequences are either not interesting to me, or are presented in ways that make them appear not to be.

If the topic actually doesn't interest me, that's fine, because I presumably won't be trying to discuss it, either. But some of the sequence titles are more pithy than informative, and some of the introductory text is dissuasive where it tries to be inviting; few of them give a clear summary of what the subject is and who needs to read it.

3) Even the ones which are interesting to me contain way more information, or at least text, than I needed.

I don't think it's actually true that every new reader needs to read all of the sequences. I'm a bad example, because there's a lot in them I've never heard of or even thought about, but I don't think that's true of everyone who walks up to LW for the first time. On the other hand, just because I'd never heard of Bayes's Theorem by name doesn't mean that I need a huge missive to explain it to me. What I turned out to need was an example problem, the fact that the general form of the math I used to solve it is named after a guy called Bayes, and an explanation of how the term is used in prose. I was frustrated by having to go through a very long introduction in order to get those things (and I didn't entirely get the last one).

My proposal for addressing these is to create a single introductory page with inline links to glossary definitions, and from there to further reading. The idea is that more information is available up front and a new reader can more easily prioritize the articles based on their own knowledge and interest; it would also provide a general overview of the topics LW addresses. (The About page is a good introduction to the site, but not the subjects.) On a quick search, the glossary appears to have been suggested before but not yet exist--unless I just can't find it, in which case it's not doing much good. There are parts of this I'm not qualified to do, but I'd be happy to donate time to the ones that I am.