Sure; I'll elaborate. First, I am arguing against the unapologetic championing of arcane knowledge, not the tools. I agree that awk/sed/grep/etc are powerful, and knowing how and when to use them is highly useful.
I take issue with the attitude that the way these tools are used, with their billion cryptic parameters, is some flawless pinnacle of achievement.
Some people have put a lot of effort into memorizing Unix switches already--but the difficulty doesn't mean that work was meaningful. Unfortunately, to justify their sunk cost, a subset of those individuals tout their knowledge as something by which the rest of us should be impressed. In fact, this comment thread is littered with disdain for peers who dare to tread on their domain with "human-readable names" and "documentation".
In the root article, the author simply suggests that it is more maintainable to use full names for arguments because the code is then self-documenting. It's like using completeVariableNames instead of sht_y1s. Actual comments would suffice, but most code (unfortunately) isn't commented or the comments are done badly.
If a programmer is solo, whatever. Go nuts. Use shortcuts; don't comment. Hard-code paths in your scripts and write 600-line functions. A coder only has herself to blame for the problems she caused.
However, when programming with a group there will always be coworkers that can start being productive sooner (without interrupting you) if things are named and described in plain English and do exactly what it looks like they do.
Script switches are not a remotely interesting problem. Which style you use is a meaningless debate--until you factor in time. Time to debug. Time to look up documentation. Time to memorize. Time is a truly scarce resource, and there exists a better way than rote memorization: making code work in an obvious way. Actively choosing not to employ this idea steals time from others and those of us that lose minutes so a shortcutting programmer can save seconds of typing don't appreciate it.
That said, it's up to one's discretion about what "obvious" means. But nobody should try to argue that making things more readable is inherently bad.