Absolutely not! Please take this the wrong way, but I don't see how an old friend could have not noticed the MASSIVE increase in traffic (and the problems it brought).
Here's some official 2005-2013 traffic statistics from the 10 years anniversary panel I compiled just to prove you wrong: https://i.4cdn.org/s4s/1527869817275.png
Cheers.
Old friend - Certainly. The fact the idean of anon is default (though optional) means each post can be besed on it's on value / meritocrious as it carries no internet points of the 'owner'. Anarchy, but the negative that term often brings should not be carelessly and automatically applied.
I've noticed over the years that the bigger a board grows (see /b/, /pol/, /v/) the worst the quality and serious discussion gets, and the more funposting there is.
Every year people complain that their boards are getting worse, part of it is just those people growing older, but the other part is the community becoming larger, different, and noticeably more mainstream.
I couldn't see much notable in the article, aside from a negative slew at the start, and some 'the other side of the coin' in the above quote.
15 years is noteworthy, however, and I'm surprised so short, as I started visiting it back in 2003/2004; it seemed about as busy then as today. 4chan hasn't changed much from an external perspective. Traffic has probably been at stable levels for years, while the price of traffic has fallen.
I quite enjoy it's existence. There is a great diversity between message boards. Some are the reverse of b and pol highlighted in the article, as is the case on Reddit. Anonymous can be good. a la Hacker News's freedom of registration.