OK, people out there who don't like critics, I get it. You don't like critics, don't think we serve a purpose, wish there were no such thing. It's not worth arguing anymore. I'll trot out my old analogy: arguing over the value of critics in the artistic process with you all is like fighting over whether God is a man or woman to an athiest. You don't believe and never will. That's fine.
I'll offer another analogy: critics are like state-run lotteries. Some people think they're just plain fun, some think they are a vital but unfortunate aspect of the process, still others think they are evil and should be banned. Many don't even give them a second thought. The thing is: critics have been around as long as there has been theater and I expect they'll be around as long as there is any kind of performing arts, television, movies, virtual 3D interactive experiences, etc.
Before state-run lotteries, there were (and still are) illegal numbers games. If I wasn't published in Style, I would still write my opinions on this blog and some people would still be interested in them (even if it was just my wife and children). People have always been interested in opinions expressed in a literate (or even semi-literate) way, which is why newspaper have always had editorial pages.
So the bottom line to me is that, whether you like it or not, critics are here. If you don't like it, for God's sake, please stop reading my blog and wasting my time. My opinion is not worth anything to you, so why do you waste your time reading it?
Beyond that, I'm bored with this discussion and I expect others -- who come to this space to read about theater, not about critics -- are bored as well. So comment away if you like -- on someone else's blog. But this particular topic is closed as far as I'm concerned.