Leaving aside your frenzied name-calling, you are unclear on the concept of criticism. It is possible to make and even promulgate value judgements on the work o

Leaving aside your frenzied name-calling, you are unclear on the concept of criticism. It is possible to make and even promulgate value judgements on the work of other people; further, to suggest that some ways of spending your free time are objectively more useful or interesting than others. This applies even if you don't pony up the cash to fund alternative works. As a rule academics, writers, artists and critics (for example) have all felt reasonably empowered to say all sorts of things about each other - often in language that would make my 'why is this interesting' stuff seem positively tame - without giving undue weight to the fact that the target of the criticism could be otherwise spending time watching soccer or masturbating. When I got my ass rightfully handed to me for trying to get a mediocre paper into SIGMETRICS a few years back, not one reviewer made positive mention of the fact that at least I was writing lousy papers as opposed to, say, punching people on the street or making a color-sorted collection of my nose pickings. Casual internet forum judgements are worth very little, and one can ignore them one sees fit. I don't remember the bit where I proposed making further research on the Hurd illegal or running them out of town on a rail. One might even muster up a coherent argument against such judgements that doesn't depend on the All Important Right of Enthusiasts to Exist in a Plane Above All Comment on the Relevance of their Work.