Asking that a critic read those sequences in their entirety is asking for a huge sacrifice; little is offered to show it's even close in being worth the misery of reading inept writing or the time.

Indeed, the sequences are long. I'm not sure about the others here, but I've never asked anybody to "read the sequences."

But I don't even know how to describe the arrogance required to believe that you can dismiss somebody's work as "crazy," "stupid," "megalomanic," "laughably, pathologically arrogant," "bonkers," and "insufferable" without having even read enough of what you're criticizing the get an accurate understanding of it.

ETA: Edited in response to fubarobfusco, who brought up a good point.