Honestly? Because the whole article reads like it was written by the sort of socially oblivious person who doesn't work well in a team.

When everyone else appears to be the issue, perhaps it's worth considering one other possibility...

There's something about the writing style on that page too. Hard to describe.

"If you encounter three jerks in one day, you're the jerk."

Community of jerks usually easily accept another jerks, so it's quite possible to find yourself among jerks even if you're not jerk.

Ha! You've never worked as an air traffic controller. That job attracts type-A personality jerks like honey attracts flies. I've met dozens of jerks at one time. And not a single one of them would call me a jerk. Okay, maybe one or two of them would. It's such a toxic environment—I had to resign.

He's obviously not a team player!

(I'm totally kidding; your question is an excellent one.)

What's funny to me is how sometimes there are two qualities -- being both more competent (than one's peers) and not liked -- that in combination can further perceptions that someone "isn't a team player"..in the eyes of The Majority, the same people who are the real problem.

If the team says pigs can fly, the sky is red and Bob isn't a team player, all of those things might as well be true. After all, perception is reality.

A team has its dynamics. It is difficult to join a team if you have a self assigned mission from the get go. The author seemed to have done that.

The author was also smarter before he was empathetic. When he saw someone become touched after the criticism he put forth, he should have changed pace. And changed focus. Instead of focusing on the critiques, he could have focused on the outlying problems contributing to those critiques.

Instead of ignoring the responses everyone made to good suggestions, he could have been more accepting and started to beat the same drum.

Point is to find common ground first. Solutions come second.