This kind of clarification is exactly why I posted this link. It's great to clear the air in one respect and at the same time ask the question, "is there something on the CS site needing change to avoid this confusion?"
When I visit the site and I see a table with CoffeeScript on one side and Javascript on the other, my brain sees just enough to verify that the expected elements are all there before it says, "Yep - there is the comparison you wanted".
So while it does clearly state that the JavaScript is the output of the tool, my brain has already decided that it is exactly what I was expecting, and it takes me a second to re-adjust my thoughts.
Ironically, if the output looked less "normal" I probably wouldn't have the same problem, but it is formatted nicely and is good enough that subconsciously my brain tells me "equivalent syntax" and not "compiler output".
It doesn't do enough to warrant learning the abstraction syntax.
CoffeeScript on the left, compiled JavaScript output on the right.
Maybe the two halves should have the headers directly aligned above them:
> CoffeeScript
> The JavaScript that it compiles to.
Other than that, it's hard to make it any clearer for its intended audience (people who know JS and know what the words "compiled" and "output" mean).
Still, I'm tempted to upvote the OP as good Friday satire.