Dunno. Looks rather like they are trying to make it out like Extreme Tech was out to get Nvidia for some nefarious reason.
Of course, I doubt the article writer contacted Extreme Tech for comment prior to the article being published. I couldn't find any that mentioned if they tried to or not.
If they had, then I suspect that some of the questions they raised could have been answered.
"Why wasn't there more attention to detail in the Extreme Tech article? There could have been more screen shots or even map diagrams showing where the clipping planes and camera paths were."
"How did a copy of the Developer version of 3DMark 2003 get into Extreme Tech's hands?"
"Why wasn't this test done with other nVidia cards?"
As far as I know it was also seen on NV30 and NV31 cards so it's not specific to just NV35 cards.
"Somebody had to test for and find this anomaly before hand. Who's pulling the strings here?"
That last one kind of makes one suspect that there might be an agenda behind this article.
Then we throw in the following to further obfuscate the issue...
"Why do we even trust Rolling Demo Benchmarks anymore? If this turns out not to be a cheat, what does that say about Synthetic 3D Benchmarking? Why is the only bit of evidence is a few screen shots?"
So the entire test that uncovered this issue is now suspect and should simply be ignored.
Yes it's frustrating that we all can't see this for ourselves and have to rely on screenshots.