I understand as an employer you'll want someone who, when you get into a rage and bust up a printer, won't quit and head for greener pastures. It may seem an exaggeration, but as we both know, these things actually happen and while this might not be what the original author had in mind, many, many places of employment are awash in insanity. When you are young and just getting a start, it's easy to miss the warning signs in the interview or just have less options.

Job hopping in response to that might just reveal quick growth in skill, leading to better alternatives. It is a competition both ways. That guy that job hops a lot, maybe he can do that _despite_ a resume showing what employers consider disadvantageous, because his or her expertise is clear in interviews. Almost by definition, job hoppers are more in demand.

The ultimate goal of an employer should be to attract and retain the best employees. It is true that retaining is easier if you decide to exclusively pick from people who didn't have better options when their jobs suck, but personally, I'd rather have someone like you who left when the scene got crazy. Maybe that's just because it so closely reflects my experiences. (In fact, I think we shared an employer)