Oh, I totally agree. My handy list of reccers is not random, after all; it's not going to give a true overview of fandom's taste because it's a specific sub-set. And you're quite right about embarrassment too: I do think of melodrama as a guilty pleasure (despite my doctorate focusing on melodramatic sf--the space opera), so I only rec the very best of the best of the best in that genre. Of course that's a result of our culture's current obsession with realist literature, which I don't entirely understand. What's so special about realism? What's so distatesful about fantasy? *shrugs* But I'm sure there are other things I self-censor too.

To go back to one of my earliest points in this discussion, I think the cringe about critiquing also effects reccing and the profile of stories. I see critique as engagement, as a compliment, but I still feel reluctant to do it in any significant way within fandom (my recs are like Cliff Notes, and I rarely rec something that requires more commentary), and I think that impacts on the profile of worthwhile but difficult stories. Something like "Freedom" is the exception that proves the rule, perhaps. I think part of the willingness to engage publicly with "Freedom" is because the story is so obviously well-crafted and thoughtful, and that means that any critique is clearly more than just "criticism." In my experience it's easy to accidentally give the impression of "negative" criticism, especially when engaging with a very new author who isn't used to the academic system of give and take.