I read that pdf and it is not exactly rigorous. Eg page 4: "Should depend only on the outcome observed and not on any other outcome we might have observed and

I read that pdf and it is not exactly rigorous. Eg page 4: "Should depend only on the outcome observed and not on any other outcome we might have observed and thus sharply contrasts with the method of likelihood inference from the Neyman-Pearson, or more generally from a frequentist, approach. In particular, questions of unbiasedness, minimum variance and risk, consistency, the whole apparatus of confidence intervals, significance levels, and power of tests, etc., violate the conditionality principle." and "Here is yet another scenario that will not impress a conditionalist:" You don't write a paper to trash a POV. You put your own thesis across. That thing is bollocks.