Firstly, don't swear, if you have to resort to that in an argument you're clearly not doing well.
Secondly, the level curve is setup with the mindset of "there's a second region". While Johto being easier was a downside, that was so the curve could continue into Kanto up to Red. Certainly a better curve than your beloved Gen5 which after the main game dumps you with a 10+ level disadvantage to all the metagame trainers with 60s creatures.
Thirdly, showing the EXP curve was the tip of the iceberg to what Gen2 did. Day / Night? The introduction of Dark and Steel? Splitting the Special Stat? Making types like Bug and Ghost actually useful? Swarms? Rematches? The beginning of the metagame? Letting the player choose if they're a boy or a girl? None of those count? Don't be ridiculous.
Fourthly, you really need to get some perspective. I don't say that "99% yadda" phrase because its my personal opinion, I say it because that's the way it is. You can make arguments for Gen1, 2, 3 or 5 being the best, and that's fine. But there is no argument for Gen2 being the worst because of everything it accomplished and did for the franchise, hence why it won out. And you're more than welcome to go back to the voting topic where most people who named their worst gen had it as 3 or 4. Former because Hoenn is so devisive, latter because it didn't add much, as my quote in the article says.
And finally, "how dare I compare Gen2 to 5"? In an article about comparing the generations? Seriously dude. They both stand waaaay above the others in terms of quality, and I'm damn happy they were the top two in this, because heaven knows they deserve to be.