From the guidelines:

> Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article.

Highlighting something in an article that shows that a poster clearly hasn't read some or all of the article is "insinuating", and seems to be widely accepted. (And why not - a counter argument based directly on the source material seems perfectly reasonable.)

Maybe the guidelines need to change to say not directly call it out, which is what you seem to be objecting to.

So downvote and say "the article mentions that" with a relevant quote (as per the guidelines). Commenting with "did you read the article?" is just noise.

Exactly what I just said. But that is "insinuating", which is what is warned against in the guidelines. Directly calling it out isn;t mentioned.

The guidelines are backwards.

Lower carbon footprint of construction, more expensive, lower noise during construction. I read it, none of those benefits are worth the risks to me.

The article directly addresses those risks, asserting that they are not significant.