Agreed, the plain text loses a bit too much of the original meaning. For example they refer to ID people without saying what it means. I had to flip back to the

Agreed, the plain text loses a bit too much of the original meaning. For example they refer to ID people without saying what it means. I had to flip back to the non-plain version where they write Intellectually Disabled before introducing it as an abbreviation. (Edit they actually list it higher in the article in the plain version, guess I missed it while skimming, but they write the full words multiple times in the non-plain. It still feels like rather than just simplifying what they say, they just say less). It also feels like the non-plain version is more complex than it needs to be. I agree with the point though, maybe they're exaggerating both sides. But I feel like either side could benefit from being a bit closer to the middle of the complexity spectrum.