A more sensible approach would've been to emphasize that akrasia is an extremely common problem for humans, and that people who don't suffer from akrasia in regards to diet probably suffer from akrasia about something else. [...]

I have no plans of discussing Taubes claims about carbohydrates having a unique ability to mess up the systems that regulate weight.

Really? Basically you are arguing that you don't want to discuss Taubes central claim and instead argue that it would be helpful to speak about akrasia based on no evidence that doing so is useful?

If Taubes is right about common obesity being primarily caused by effects of insulin then mainstream nutrition experts actually are wrong on the main claims about obesity. He might framed the details a bit strange at a few instances but he would be right with the substance of his criticism.

Why We Get Fat (p. 99): "We don't get fat because we overeat; we overeat because we're getting fat." [...]

On the one hand it seems that he does: he talks about how calorie intake affects calorie expenditure, but he doesn't claim they march so closely in lockstep that it's literally impossible to lose weight by cutting calorie intake.

One claim is about losing weight, the other is about gaining weight. Just because you can obviously lose weight by succeeding in cutting calories it's not as obvious that you can gain weight by adding more calories.

That's what you would expect if Taubes's claim of common obesity being due to insulin is right. Taubes claims that insulin makes them put on fat and then they overeat.