Sloppy writing is not a sign of sloppy science

This is illogical self-promotion of laxity in science writing. Whereas there is not a 1 to 1 correlation between grammar and spelling, there is a relationship. Aside from 2nd or 3rd language issues, the issue is sloppiness and ignorance of the fundamentals.

I wonder if the author's experience has been that editors who pay attention to semicolons don't notice how the tone of an article can discredit its argument. (THE's editors might have done their readers a great service by challenging the writer's use of "tad OCD," for example.) I can't tell if his opinion based on actual research, or if this just a heartfelt plea for people to stop making him feel bad about his writing errors. If that's all his editors are doing for him, he needs to find editors who can help save him from the flaws (logical and psychological) in his thinking.

If one can't write very well, multi-authorship is the way forward as others can help sort it (as I'm sure AF realises). I don't see any particular virtue in having poor grammar, however, and those who put a lot of effort into this kind of detail don't deserve to be described as passive-aggressive - a term I'd use to describe this piece. Mathematics is a discipline which demands utmost care and precision in writing, and it is one of the most creative of endeavours (by the way).