That's an interesting take. How is it "badly written"?I don't know who was in that review panel, but I can tell it was badly written. It's a flawed experiment because he took months putting the thing together to make it more structured, which itself is a part of the act of composing, and still came up with bad results. His motive is really to try to fool the judges, and make light of serial music. He may have succeeded in some way, but it's not nearly as conclusive as he is trying to make it seem.
Those who are indignant seem to be indignant over the fact that some jurors were duped, and at the sentiments expressed by the OP. But the "piece" in question seems like it would fit under the heading of "aleatory music", which I guess is legit.