To the extent that it's true, it's only the first thesis statement of a lengthy examination of the actual issue

The rest of the sequence this would need to herald to be truly useful is not guaranteed to be nearly as fun

Yep. It's intended as an introduction to the long and not-very-exciting metaethics sequence.

How would I apply this idea to my life?

Wait a second, this idea actually isn't nearly as useful as it seemed at first.

Yeah, it tends to melt down under examination. (because "awesome" is a fake utility function, as per point 2). The point was not to give a bulletproof morality procedure, but to just reframe the issue in a way that bypasses the usual confusion and cached thoughts.

So I wouldn't expect it to be useful to people who have their metaethical shit together (which you seem to, judging by the content of your rituals). It was explicitly aimed at people in my meetup who were confused and intimidated by the seeming mysteriousness of morality.

I am now dramatically more interested in the subject of how interesting this post seemed vs how interesting it actually was and what this says about the internet and people and ideas, then about the content of the article.

Yes the implications of this are very interesting.