This behavior is particularly insidious because it is self-reinforcing

As I understand your post, the behavior you mean is talking about rationality without putting it into practice. But the way it is written sound to me like you mean accusing LW oftalking about rationality without putting it into practice.

A recent attempt to counter this trend or at least make us feel better about it was a series of discussions on "leveling up": [...] stands in stark contrast to articles emphasizing practical altruism such as "efficient charity"

Instead of "leveling up" you could have taken "efficient charity" as an example. I think you like that article better, so it seems more honest to me to take it as an example of a more practical post. Mentioning both articles like that makes it too obvious that you singled out "leveling up" for rhetoric reasons.

So what's the solution? I don't know. However I can tell you a few things about the solution, whatever it may be:

I'm very skeptical about those following points. You did not give convincing arguments for them.

Whatever you may decide to do, be sure it follows these principles. If none of your plans align with these guidelines then construct a new one, on the spot, immediately

That seems like bad advice. I think your guidelines are advocating reversed stupidity.

I declare Crocker's rules on the writing style of this post.

I think you are doing it wrong. Declaring Crocker's rule allows others to be harsh to you, it doesn't allow you to be harsh to others.