> I wonder what motivated the article's author to redact the scammer's email address.

This is good practice to prevent the possibility of revictimization in case the actual motive of the phishing attack was not phishing but to cause reputational damage to the owner of said email.

Consider: if someone wanted to target you and cause you potential legal and employment difficulties, they could launch a phishing attack using amateur code such as this, and have your work email appear as the "scammer's email", and then sit back and wait for the attack to be discovered and reported.

And even if not a reputation attack, the scammer could also simply be using a compromised email account, so once again redaction helps preempt the possibility of revictimization.

Just a guess: the author could not be sure that the email address legitimately belongs to the scammer. It could be a hacked account.