First of all, you're exaggerating tremendously, as I don't see anybody "quitting their career" over documentation, and literally nobody is talking about impostor syndrome (in the article or comments here). You're seeing things that aren't there.

But secondly, I think what you're writing is a great example of how their are two philosophies or ideologies of communication.

One philosophy (that you seem to subscribe to) is that it's the prerogative of the speaker (writer) to communicate however they think is right, and it's the responsibility of the listener (reader) to do the work to understand it, and reponsibility for miscommunication lies with the listener. To use your words, the speaker doesn't need to "baby" the listener, and the listener is wrong to be "personally offended".

But the other philosophy is that it's the responsibility of the speaker to communicate in a way that will be best understood, and it's the prerogative of the listener to note where the speaker's communication is unclear, misleading, frustrating, or offensive to the listener. It's the speaker's job to make a good faith effort to know their audience and communicate appropriately for that audience, and to apologize and rephrase when they make mistakes.

Now, which one is right? Well, there is no "right". What there is is -- which one serves you better as the speaker? Which philosophy will further your goals, which one will get you further in life?

Well if your goal is to be able to get angry at listeners/readers who don't get it and feel smarter than others, by all means adopt the first philosophy. But if your goal is for your speech and writing to have the impact you want it to have, the second philosophy is going to be more productive for you. And calling people "babies" is about as counterproductive as you can be in terms of getting people to listen to you.