I agree with the Sir part, but it’s clearly Gruber’s irony there. The article being negative isn’t a proper critique though: it’s a pundit writing, it’s not the

I agree with the Sir part, but it’s clearly Gruber’s irony there. The article being negative isn’t a proper critique though: it’s a pundit writing, it’s not their role to make things better, but to point out fallacies and pain points. He did, in my opinion quite properly.