> The post is about removing some unnecessary wording from technical documentation that doesn't add anything, and as an aside can sometimes imply complex tasks are simpler than they are to the detriment of the app/library/service it's documenting.

I'm not sure that's a fair summary of the article. I just reread it: at no point does it suggest removing superfluous words in general, it's specifically about "words such as easy, painless, straightforward, trivial, simple and just", because those in particular are "jolting", "upsetting and annoying" and "infuriating". What you frame as an "aside" is in fact the first and last paragraph of the article.

> I have no idea why you'd think this implies some personal failing or that it is advice for "babies"

You're missing a level of indirection here, it's advice for people who write for people who act offended when reading "simply" in technical documentation, and I'm questioning the dynamics of that.

It's obviously fair to criticize the word choice on my part, there were obviously less incisive ways to phrase that. But then, it's the article that claims that the usage of the word "just" in the sentence (the article's example) "[then] we will just edit the users_controller.rb" is "condescending", and I think that's simply (sic) insane.