This is a typical Adcock rant. Don't even ignore him, as they say in Vienna.
You deny that much of what PG posts looks like crap??? I can see making excuses about how hard it would be to fix the problem, but to deny that the problem exist in the first place??? Let's turn it around: What at PG doesn't look like crap? Answer: Much of the submitted HTML doesn't look like crap, because most people care enough not to submit something that looks bad. Now mind you, their HTML coding choices may be bad, but the rendering itself typically doesn't look bad -- when you read it using a "top 3" web browser on a desktop. And their choices may be ignorant of how bad their choices will look when rendered into epub or mobi....etc. And you may ask the question why they don't test their own HTML converted to epub or mobi using their own tools (such as kindlegen) -- since in practice they cannot use the PG tool chain? But, to deny the problem in the first place???