It's very strange to me that some people actually don't like bold text to emphasize relevant parts.

It's the easiest way to aid speed reading/allowing mental prose-to-bullet point conversion.

For me it's a sign of respect for time of the reader who is likely overwhelmed with information and wants to focus on the most important parts.

I've written some technical documents this way. In one company I got explicit email that this helped a lot and was great idea. Implementation that followed went smoothly.

In other company it has been seen as silly, all emphasis was removed, bullet points expanded to prose, useless brochure like logos/typography added - of course I'm biased but this document stands in my head as the shittiest/least useful/confusing/verbose documents I had to deal with.

I think to really appreciate this approach you'd have to test it yourself on 50 page document and discover how fast you can digest 80% of information included.

Likely practicing speed reading will help to appreciate it more.

It's a bit like medium highlights - but it's designed by the author, it can be really, really useful, but it's niche and very rare to see unfortunately.

I have never read italics as whispering. I usually read it as emphasis or stress. I read ALL CAPS as shouting. I read bold as important. I only see bold as aggressive if emotionally charged language is bolded (ie: marked as important by the writer).

I find it interesting that others may still perceive these differently than either of us.