Well, you've met one now, so you can update that assumption. And also if you look higher up this thread, the author of this article takes it seriously as well. So that's two already in a pretty short time!

The comment you’re referring to merely refrains from making a value judgment, while you’re turning it into an approval of OOP.

>Thinking in OOP terms in, say, Java is great.

How did you interpret this statement?

Compare:

thinking in OOP terms in say, Haskell, is terrible. -> doesn’t mean OOP is terrible or that Haskell is terrible.

Thinking in functional terms in Haskell is great. -> doesn’t mean functional programming is great or that Haskell is great.

All it means is that the language is designed to be used with that paradigm.