It would have been nice for the author to recognize that the reason that we have the DRY principle is because there is a natural need to repeat. If information and processes didn't need to be repeated then DRY wouldn't exist in the first place.
e.g.
I have an allergy attack.
Allergy medication will relieve an allergy attack.
I desire allergy medication.
I will go to the drug store and ask for allergy medication.
However, the sense of repeat used in the submitted article rather concerns redundancy, whereby the concept itself or a particular relationship is repeated in a redundant manner, without adding new information. This is merely to prevent miscommunication.
I find that many people don't have the context. I suspect part of it is that I don't see the world the same way most people see it. Shorter remarks rely on shared context to be properly understood. Example: In my teens, I remarked to my father that I was considering "running" (something). I was a role playing gamer considering taking up gamemastering. He assumed I meant jogging for exercise. I didn't bother to try to correct. It seemed futile.