I didn't read the entire article because the first paragraph set the tone of negativity. And I'm tired of it.
I think his point was he selectively edited the excerpt to be as misleading as possible, and sure enough some people were misled and didn't read the article.
His point being I suppose (or at least the point I got) that if posters want to make this a useless exercise they can do so by selective and misleading edits.
Or maybe there was a different point.
I didn't read the article yet because I usually look at some comments first to see if anybody found it useful. There are hundreds of articles to read, and even I don't read that fast.