While it strikes an even-handed tone, it fails to be very honest or fair. I detect considerable spin. At least the article didn't include his last name.
The Hacker News take: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23781743
Interesting. Maybe I'd change my mind if I re-read it, but I want to flag that my first impression of this article was very positive. It seemed to me like the article highlighted several of Scott's qualities and contributions that make him look like the kind and relatable person that he is. And the critical stuff seems like what you'd expect by someone who is trying to present a balanced view (and some of it may well be accurate takes). There are some clear exceptions, e.g., I didn't like the accusation of (slightly) bad faith on Scott's part in asking SSC commenters to contact the NY times in a respectful manner, or that the author talked about Damore as though it was so-obvious-as-to-not-even-worth-arguing-for that he did something really bad.
I should flag that I only read this very quickly, and I had very pessimistic expectations. Sometimes when you expected something absolutely terrible, and you get something that's merely bad, you think it's very good. :)