I apologize. My intent was to use sarcasm to comment about the nature of internet publishing and curating in general, and I believe it came across as criticism towards this author or work. That was not my intention. In fact it was just the opposite.

There is a lot of trash that gets returned in a Google search at times, yes, but there are also a lot of authors out there simply taking a subject and providing their own unique spin on it. Every time somebody publishes -- anything at all -- they open themselves up to exactly the types of criticism the author of this pieces makes about other publishers on the net. I saw other commenters doing this on HN about this particular article and the irony struck me as astounding. The only thing I would have added to his piece is a discussion about exactly what he means as "bad" or "good", since everybody fills in the blanks with their own prejudices when these concepts are mentioned, and that's not a good thing for purposes of the discussion.

I should have known better than to try to be subtle. Humor almost never consistently works the way you want it to on the net. Always backfires in some fashion.