What surprises me is that this was the number one 'featured article' in this week's mailing from sqlservercentral.com. This must either be because:

A) The 'featured articles' are just chosen at random, in which case it would be better to call them 'randomly-chosen articles', OR...

B) The person who chooses the featured articles wasn't able to tell (like surely most SQL Server developers would be able to at a glance) that this is a significantly flawed article - which would be rather scary.

Something went wrong here.