So you're saying that because people like your stuff, I already have the power to violate their integrity because I provocatively stated that honest responses to your publications are not self-evident?

That means, by implication, that people who comment here always do so honestly, understandingly and authentically? If that were so, you'd probably be the only one on the planet whose audience is capable of such a thing. LOL

Isn't it the aim and desire of art to be inappropriate and if it is, I would think that the audience would also exhibit such inappropriateness.

If the combination of text and image is your kind of performance, I agree that the possibility is very likely that I do not understand it as you yourself understand it.
The example you gave me (golf game) caused me no connection between your visuals and your story. So you expect that here is a connection between what I see in the images contained therein and your golf course episode, I can only say there is none. I found the story entertaining and it could have stood alone, without the images at all.
In other words, I criticised for being confronted with too much information in this kind of performance and you can of course say that's my problem. But you could also react completely differently and ask yourself if you could possibly reduce your performance and the abundance of information, for example.
If you arbitrarily connect images with stories the whole thing rather gets an additional jumbled character for me, the statements increase in the measure that the text increases in mass and weaken the visual (my opinion, not more).

I do not exclude the possibility that others like me do not perceive the connection between text and image as a unity, but separately.

If you think I have violated anyone's integrity, you seem to have a prior knowledge of these "others", i.e. how quickly someone sees theirs violated. Whether someone does that or peels an egg on it is for the one who wants to say it to say.

You said that it was fine if I didn't understand. What now? Is not understanding and suggesting something else too much of an imposition for you? Since I have already admitted that I have no power to demand that you produce art that I can understand, this point should be adequately covered. After all, it would be too funny if I stood up and told you, "Do it differently! Do it the way I like it!" and then expect you to do exactly that.
What if you don't do it? Well, nothing, there is no consequence whatsoever in relation to you and me.

For my part, I can say that what you call flaks, provocative statements about what I said or did are the salt in the soup of my life. After all, the annoying ones, the ones giving me contra, have always been the ones who either taught me to listen better, sharpen my arguments or otherwise gain some insight. I haven't necessarily thanked them for it, of course, but have been annoyed with them, had to look at my bruised ego first, etc. - but am free to decide at any time whether it is just hot air or has some substance I want to be interested in.

I would have been more surprised if things were different between you and me. Whether you say bullshit or hot air or violate integrity makes little difference.