Thanks for your input, but after a few decades of teaching English and editing English publications, I can assure you, I am qualified to teach English vocab. Particularly to ESL students.
As for my not including the proper and actual "dictionary" definitions, I did that intentionally. When I originally compiled the material that became "Vocab-ability," my intention was to make it understandable for those students for whom English was not their native tongue. Consequently, I made an extra effort to keep the definitions easily understandable.
I can assure you that while those definitions found in the American Heritage Dictionary or Merriam-Webster might be useful for native speakers, those definitions will not help beginner-level or mid-level ESL students. In fact, such "native-speaker-level" definitions will only serve to confuse lower- or mid-level ESL students.
As it is, Vocab-ability can help mid-level or advanced-level students learn and improve their vocabulary by introducing them to the target vocab in a clear and accessible way. It is not intended to teach them the subtle nuances of the target words, nor the etymology. That would only confuse most students. And that's not the way to learn a second language. As a teacher of English and a student of 3 other languages, I can assure you that I know about effective language-acquisition techniques.
Also, if you believe that the 4 examples / target words do not typify "crazed person" or "lunatic." then how would you define them? For instance, would you define a pyromaniac as someone who just happens to have excessive enthusiasm for fire? That would be of no benefit to most ESL students.
Finally, the point of the original Vocab-ability publication, of these Vocab-ability posts, and of the Vocab Practice exercises is to introduce learners to the vocab roots and to help them learn. And many have benefited from Vocab-ability.
And believe me, I can teach not only vocabulary, but grammar, writing, and more. Much more. Very effectively, and with solid results. Many of my students could attest to that.
Does that answer your question about my "suitability"?
Hmmm, I guess "malpractice" is as good as practice – at least in this case.