And yet, in the thread linked by Scumpup, there were people who explicitly stated that they had taken the time to read and think about particular authors like Shakespeare, but that they still found themselves bored by those works. And instead of saying to them, “Well, if you’ve taken the time to read Shakspeare and figure it out, and you still find his work boring, then that’s fine,” you continued to wade in with accusations of ignorance and lack of life experience.
For example, Martini Enfield made clear that he had read Shakespeare and seen Shakespeare performed and still doesn’t find Shakespeare interesting. This was not a case of “[a]cting dismissive toward something that [he hadn’t] taken the time to try to figure out”; he was saying that he had taken the time, and still found it uninteresting. Yet instead of accepting his assessment as a valid personal opinion based on experience and familiarity, you basically said that the only reason he finds Shakespeare uninteresting is that he doesn’t understand it well enough.
So, apparently if someone doesn’t appreciate something that you feel is worth appreciating, it is only because they have not made an honest effort at appreciation, and thus remain ignorant. I guess you are not only the arbiter of whether something is good or not, but also of whether other people (people you don’t even know) have made sufficient effort to appreciate it.