Beyond that, criticism based on a simplistic aversion to the mere usage of an LLM can be ablelist. I think few of us want to give our own time to things others didn't invest time in, but how do you really know why the reader used an llm, or even if they did, at a surface level?

There's obviously no obligation to read someone else's shit, but there's no obligation to criticize it without context either. Why not criticize the content instead of the assumed methods?