Stereophile complains it's readers are too informed.

Agreed cleeds, intresting to see people “translate” what is said, into what they want it to say. I believe that’s actually the point of that last paragraph. That some people are using what they say and post, in a way that was not said, nor meant. There does seem to be a subset of the community who are biased towards certain views, and not open to any that don’t correspond to those. While some may not agree with a review or comment, they have no problem with someone who feels differently, but there is a group who it bothers greatly if anyone doesn’t acknowledge their views as the “correct” interpretation. 

Did I miss something?

I did. The issue is the context of the article, which you’d have to be reading the comments from recent speaker reviews to get.

While they invoke Toole here, they don’t in their reviews and completely ignore glaring differences from classical speaker design in their measurements, so they complain that their readers are using good speaker design practices to judge their measurements and reviews.

I agree with the overall statements, that speakers should be judged by the intention of the developer, not an industry standard. That’s fine. What I disagree with is that they feel no reason to point these differences themselves, and also ignore times when they’ve been dead wrong in their conclusions, or biased towards speakers that had obvious color and called them neutral.

They are producing measurements without context and are upset the readers will.

Best,

E

Stereophile seems pretty straightforward to me and they seem to be clear about their measurements. Of course, measurements can never tell the whole story and they're not a substitute for listening.

Stereophile is one of the few magazines that actually conducts its own measurements, so the OP's claim that the magazine "complains it's (sic) readers are too informed" just doesn't make sense.