The whole discussion starts from a what I would say is an incorrect assertion, and then goes on to describe lots of ways that letters can be made better. If, in fact, you don't need better, then a lot of the points go away.
1. There is a point of diminishing returns, past which you are spending a lot more money for very little benefit.
2. There exists a point beyond which "better letters" are unlikely to contribute much to daily work.
Both of those points are, to some extent, the same point. But either way, the idea that you MUST get as good of a monitor as you can" is, in my opinion, untrue and not worth basing an entire document on.
I'd rather see a discussion of which features of a monitor contribute the most (per $) to how well they function for daily work. For gaming, I want high refresh rate and high contrast. For TV, the contrast (real black) goes up in importance. For daily work, neither of those is a huge contributor to how well I can work.
