The first post is one man's opinion of grades, ask the next man in the street and they will have different opinions. So it's up to oneself, as a collector to decide. There is no right or wrong, so therefore, by default, there is no battle to be won.
I think a fair reading of the first post suggests that it was intended as a tutorial, and as such it’s a decent start. (Although I disagree with its introductory sentences, which to me seem much too dismissive of coin grading, and so, perhaps, somewhat discouraging to exactly the people most inclined to get real benefit from it.)
And I think it’s far from correct to suggest that coin grading is some sort of solitary activity, and that whatever answers we arrive at on our own are automatically…competent. No. I don’t think it works that way at all. Instead, coin grading is very much a process of
consensus, and I strongly believe it’s a consensus the hobby should be continually working to refine—and expand—across borders. I want to be able to talk about coins with someone in...whatever country, and be talking (and
listening) while using fundamentally the same body of basic coin-knowledge. And yes, by basic coin-knowledge, one of the first things I mean is a common idea of coin grading.
There are plenty of good reasons that ought to happen; one of the best, I think, is forming a common front against fraud. Historically, one of the best legal defenses that the unscrupulous have had against their victims is the lack of a consistent grading system within the coin hobby. Today, because of a lot of work in developing a coherent grading framework, it’s a less useful refuge than it used to be—but only in some venues.
So that’s a battle that needs to be won in more places, I think, and the idea that “there is no right or wrong” when it comes to coin grading is, I think, a guarantee of early defeat, for collectors anyway.

v.