I'm fairly sure I do have the technical chops to talk about the content, being very used to C++ in all it's glory, but I don't have much to add to the article: once broken down to it's intent/meaning, it's clear to me what it's about and why the code is useful. Which is why I said it's an interesting article. And why I upvoted the post.

That being said, to address your concern: this is HN, where in my experience pretty much anything can get discussed, and not-so-topnotch blog formats is one of those things. Upvotes in this case simply mean others have the same feeling with regards to the general readability of the article. Also note that, as far as I recall, there has been more than one post - not just comment - on HN exactly about this: conveying information in a proper manner is an important aspect of the internet in general. Not just bikeshedding. Even more so for technical stuff, imo.

It seems trivial but I think it's important to discuss the aesthetic of these types of things. It's not to nitpick, it's not to make fun of a person or belittle their work (I think most people here agree it's a great post!), it's to engage in a communal discussion about what we learned here so we can apply it elsewhere. Isn't that still in the spirit of HN?

I don't find the parent comment to be the most constructive example but, ignoring the subjective criticism about the jokes, I agree there's something unusually distracting about the format.

For example, the bunnies that highlight content on the right-hand side? If you're reading the entire post, you're going to read some sentences twice over -- So why are these here? For summary? Why couldn't the summary be in a more accessible area like the top?