FWIW I find the author's obviously subjective opinions on their tools much more valuable than your obviously subjective opinions of this author.
They’re saying that we, as a community, should not elevate unsubstantiated writing that comes across as “I don’t truly understand these things or have deep experience, but this is what everyone else says on every other blog post or comment, and I’m parroting it”.
I would add on to it that I feel there’s sometimes a real thing in these discussions where reviews like these often come from people just tinkering and looking for the next thing to mindlessly experiment with. It’s not always representative of real world trade offs.
(I say all this as someone who self hosts a Gitea instance)
Kubernetes is a nightmare, and I'm glad that some people are not afraid to point out the state of the emperor's outfit.
Kubernetes started in a rough shape but it has been chiseled over the years to be boring tech that just works and provides a layer of abstraction to build abstractions on top of.
I've been working with Kubernetes for the past 6 years. It's fine. It does its job. Let's all move on from the outrage.
At least w.r.t. the original comment, this seems like a misunderstanding. GP was saying that, absent any explanation for why the author came to the opinions they did, the article doesn't say much of value. They don't dislike the author sharing their opinions on the author's own blog.
I've just been noticing a trend of people, like the article author, who are quick to dismiss things for reasons that are inconsistent and dogmatic. Why be so close minded? I think it's okay to be dismissive of the dismissive. Which, I didn't really dismiss him did I? I read his entire article.