So why was this post voted down so far? It appears to be a relevant and informative link to a non-crank source, with no incivility that I could see.

Overconfidence in the assertion. Presumption of a foregone conclusion.

It was a relevant link and I enjoyed doing the background reading finding out just how seriously relevant authorities take this fellow's stance. He is not a crank but he is someone with a large personal stake. The claim in the article seems to have an element of spin in the interpretations of interpretations as it were.

I did lower my confidence in how well I grasp QM but much of that confidence was restored once I traced down some more expert positions and scanned some wikipedia articles. I focussed in particular on whether MW is a 'pure' interpretation. That is, whether it does actually deviate from the formal math.