I regard the rejection of passive voice as quite an arbitrary norm

Feel free, but it is not arbitrary as I understand the word, because justifications are attached: generally speaking passive voice is dull to read, and passive voice obscures reality.

mainly because of the first paragraph which is significantly longer in the edited version without saying more or being clearer

It does say more. The content of the link is actually explained, clarifying things for people who don't like to follow links (perhaps because they tend to end up with millions of tabs and hours wasted) and saving time and mental energy for the rest. The mention of "metaphysics of metaethics" is just thrown out there in the original - this might be sort of OK for a purely Lesswrongian audience, but it's confusing to readers who aren't able easily to guess the author's opinion on metaphysical arguments*.

Although less problematic, I'm not keen on "rather shocking" or the use of the word dissent. "Dissent" implies that consequentialism is dogma, and "rather shocking" is a borderline oxymoron; the word "shocked" suggests to me a necessarily extreme emotion or state of mind.

*OK I did say "needless to say". But that's really just a bunch of syllables, the kind one includes to (hopefully) improve the rhythm of a sentence.