Responses to some accusations against style of my exposition

This is a very short addition to my book, in response to a person who criticized my style. He may be partly right, but:

The proofs are generally hard to follow and unpleasant to read as they are just a bunch of equations thrown at you, without motivation or underlying reasoning, etc.

I don’t think this is essential. The proofs are not the most important thing in my book. The most essential thing are definitions. The proofs are just to fill the gaps. So I deem it not important whether proofs are motivated.

Also, note “algebraic” in the title of my book. The proofs are meant to be just sequences of formulas for as much as possible 🙂 It is to be thought algebraically. The meaning are the formulas themselves.

Maybe it makes sense to read my book skipping all the proofs? Some proofs contain important ideas, but most don’t. The important thing are definitions.