People disappointed with the list need to understand that these things are pointless. Rolling Stone subscribes to a rock'n'roll "hierarchy" established from the '50s to the '70s because that's what their readership appreciates. Their lists will always reflect this. A different publication would arrive at a completely different order (except for Dylan at #1, probably, because his influence has been so widespread and is still massive today).
Taylor Swift's inclusion is obviously gratuitous because of her status in the industry at the moment, I doubt anyone at RS actually believes she is a greater or more important songwriter than many of the snubbed. No shade, and props to her for being that huge.
