Complaint 1: The recruiter asked you questions you didn't find relevant. I have often asked "curveball" questions just to see how a potential hire thinks on his feet or perhaps to see how he handles a situation in which he doesn't know the answer to something (the correct way being "I don't know that off the top of my head, good thing for Google and Stack Overflow, right?"), so it's not really up to you to determine which questions are relevant. Then again, he could have just been a dick, but not necessarily.
Complaint 2: The company had to be prompted and prodded to respond to you Certainly, this isn't very professional, and it would also leave a bad taste in my mouth, but know this: the company doesn't owe you a damn thing. Silence = rejection, simple as that. If there was anything to follow up with, I would have emailed the company that day, and then promptly put them out of my mind until they replied and kept applying to other jobs.
Complaint 3: The company didn't get back to you in a timely fashion. Unfortunately, this is simple supply and demand. Or, the company is terribly incompetent. But it seems to me that they would prioritize reviewing candidates if they had a small number who were qualified. If there was already a week backlog of candidates, they were probably getting plenty of them already.
I understand the point of your piece, that you believe the recruiter failed the company by not properly interviewing you, and that you believe that the company shot itself in the foot by not giving you a real chance. OK. Then do you really want to work at a place like that?