Lots of emotive blog style garbage padding it out, but the key parts seem to be:
I don't think she has fully grasped why the site is laughable in most cases personally. And I can't make out what angle she is going for from quote 2, 3 and 4. Logic would say that if you're making those statements, you are effectively acknowledging it is pointless to repeatedly state them across many articles, but then she goes on to say about the articles aren't for that wider readership - which it sounds like they are trying to reach.
They also want people to talk about their articles in mature settings and part of everyday conversations yet paradoxically say they don't care if the language they use is professional or respectable?? Wat.