What purpose did it serve?
It brought out your insanity regarding Egwene in the open?
Do you maybe want to parse that last pair of sentences for logical consistency? At least I always read other people's posts and if I disagree, I explain why, or don't get involved. I don't make snide remarks for the purpose solely of putting someone down. I may be "biased" if that term can be twisted to absurdly apply to assessment of fictitious characters, but I don't go around refusing to read what people wrote, because I have made up my mind, much less affecting an attitude of superiority because of it.
I have no problems saying I'm biased against you Cannoli. After a decade of discussing Egwene with you, I know you will spin anything she does in the worst possible way. Certainly, I didn't read your later posts on "Egwene's Evil", but unless you claim they are substantially different from the earlier ones, I fail to see how my judgment of them. based not just on earlier editions, but a long history of our discussions, is wrong.
Further, I have greatly enjoyed overlong and exhaustive discussions of fictional characters. But a series of essays totally lacking in nuance and serving as nothing but a monotonous discussion of the perceived evil of a character. If you want to say they were meant to be thoughtful conversation starters for a rational discussion of Egwene, I have to say my opinion of your basic conversation skills only worsens.
Lastly, my remarks about you have never been snide. I have bluntly called you insane, incoherent, rabid, and stupid on the issue of Egwene. If you think these hide an even deeper disrespect for your opinions of Egwene, let me clearly state that I don't think that is possible. There is no one whose opinion on Egwene I respect less than yours.