Because you need a refresher already:
"Full completes should not be easy, but a basic complete of the map with ignored monsters and secrets should take time and be risky, but how am I supposed to really know how it can be played if I see you save scumming through all the maps once you get over a potentially difficult hurdle, I can't take your criticism at all _especially_ for difficulty"
For maps, if you have to make saves in the middle of the map while trying to full complete it, you aren't playing the map properly for me to understand how difficult it really is. Since probably the dawn of SP mapping, maps were usually no doubt designed to be done without saves or checkpoints, you deciding to play it with saves and critique it outside of it's intended design does render your feedback mostly null.
If you want to think about it some more, if you get lucky and make it to the middle of the map and save, but die to a cyber at the end, but respawn again at the middle of the map at a fixed location and die some more, it's not known whether you would reach the middle with the same ammo, amor, or health, because you got lucky. From that it's not fully understood whether a more conservative or reckless approach would be beneficial to getting to the same spot in the middle of the map, in a better condition to complete. You throw the idea of difficulty out, so I can't fully accept your criticism.
Is that me being an asshole? Hopefully not but I'll take it anyways, because in no way would save scumming through a map to complete/full complete it is ever going to give more organic or insightful feedback than completing the map in one go (as they are almost always designed).