Are you posting it to argue a particular point of mine, or just make me aware of it for my own interest? In either case, the author seems to agree with my assessments, for the most part. He says things like, "We want players to approach an encounter, especially a Heroic encounter, as a puzzle to be solved. We want groups to communicate and strategize."

And I agree with that. What I don't care for is the seemingly arbitrary means of "difficulty" assigned to bosses. Within the same instance, there are bosses that a particular group can defeat, and ones they can't. They aren't logically laid out, either. A group might be able to defeat the first and third bosses, for example. Not because the second boss is particularly difficult from a mechanics standpoint, but because he requires a fairly simple task that can't be done at a particular gear level.

Things like that are dumb. There's no reason that, at a particular gear level, I should be able to do a randomly distributed one third of the bosses with no trouble, and be utterly wiped on the rest. It doesn't make sense to be able to handily defeat the last boss, but be annihilated by one of his underlings.