The entire article's advice strikes me as biased towards one type of reader at the expense of all others.
replies(1):
The advice assumes that people process information the same way that the author does. I'm sure a great many people do. But I'm also sure other people do not. After all, specialized and scientific writing did not evolve into a difficult to understand sentence structure for no reason.
Consider the last point. The author thinks that the description of the person dying/playing for Real Madrid is too long because he spends the entire time waiting for a verb. That's subjective. I would not have minded more information about the person before finding out that whatever happened happened.
Your explanation makes sense. I guess I can say with certainty that I often forget others don't process information the same way I do, so when I read the article, I found myself mostly agreeing with it. Other perspectives welcome, of course.
Interesting to note that this is a bit about how we communicate with each other and my previous comment gave you an impression I did not intent. For a long time, I had a running hypothesis that humans, generally speaking, are awful at communicating because they either focus on the wrong details or couch their information in too much noise. As it turns out, I have severe anxiety, which very much colors the way I interpret messaging as well as how I send it out, usually vacillating between being too blunt and too verbose with a sprinkle of too many asides. The differences in how we communicate is something I'd love to learn more about