Having followed the thread thus far, and re-reading it a couple of times, I would have to agree with Ranke Lidyek. He's clearly stated that he finds the book in question to be good, enjoyable and a strong recommendation to others. The statement that this particular work is a "classic novel or the best fantasy I've read in 30 years," is a rather bold testimonial that Ranke, not only, disagreed with, but also clarified with legitimate analysis and reasons.
The particular items he elaborated upon (i.e. dialogue, characterization, et al) hardly seem to be as vague and nebulous as some seem to be stating.
It isn't all just a matter of taste or opinion, it can't be. One cannot take a project graded poorly upon such characteristics back to the professor to argue matters of taste and opinion. How could these forums be so full of detractors of Goodkind, Eddings, Feist, Lackey, et al, if it were only matters of taste and opinion? I suppose it could just be, in generous terms, consensus opinion. It not so generous terms it's usually called 'group-think.'
Ultimately, yes, people are capable of deciding what they like and want to read. This has little, if anything, to do with the particular discipline of writing, as one of Ranke's detractors already noted with a cheap shot regarding the absence of a comma. In every human endeavor, there are varying degrees of skill displayed, but I remain convinced that an honest evaluation can discern the greater from the lesser, despite concerns of taste and/or opinion.
I will purchase and read Rothfuss, with/sans hype. I, as I've already posted, have no concerns about any 'hype.' After all, 'there's no such thing as bad press.'