In no way I expect a professional with the technical understanding on how this systems work internally to make a final evaluation at face value alone based on blog made by an illiterate and not by checking the actual doc.
But I share your fear in that sometimes companies leave this delicate selections in the hands of illiterate MBAs... like engine selections for new Boeing models...

didiplaywell

> it clearly makes no difference in practical terms

I think it makes a difference. When designing systems to work within bitcoin's limits, it is important to know what those limits are. There might be a system design that works as long as most blocks can hold 7000 transactions, but breaks if blocks are limited to 4000 transactions. Therefore, a person with this false 7 tps idea in their head might discard a very useful design simply because of false statistics. That would be bad.

supertestnet

bitcoin

TPS Counter: help debunk the "7 tps" myth

My analogy is correct in that you said "If they back up their argument with the false claim that bitcoin can only do 7 tps, when in reality it can do 13, they are wrong". 
I understand the relative proportions but it clearly makes no difference in practical terms and that's the reason L2s exist. 
My point is that the entirety of the argument is not worth of discussion regarding the FUD but the FUD itself makes no sense to start, because it's criticizing something that's designed to work the way it does. The FUD criticises big cargo ships for not going at Mach 20 when it clearly haves a distinct function.