perhaps one argument against this is that a clear, well scoped, and evidence-supported narrative document like this seems to not have been read by a healthy third of the commenters. I'm not being glib: the painfully low information density of a PP presentation is such that by the end of it, no one can claim to have missed any of the points. If the real point of the presentation is informing subsequent discussion among the attendees (which it is at my workplace) then the best written handout in the world won't get you too far if people are "skimming".

(really, I know metadiscussion is frowned upon, but it's quite striking how many comments I'm seeing state "PP is a tool" or "the deficiency is the speaker's" without touching upon the arguments against these in the piece... there's really something interesting there)