I would read that article, and vote it up, but I don't think we need to be harsh towards this one. It's a good read, makes some good points and I'm thankful for it.
Were it something pointing out the trade-offs that he found when rolling his own frameworks and I wouldn't be so put-off by it. But when an article wants to argue for something and its justifications could be used to conclude the exact same opposite? I fail to find those good points, to be honest.
