Hm. My point was more that some of his articles are little more than "And to hell with this type in particular" and less that he's rambling. I agree on the ENTP bit, but if I'm being brutally honest, the feeling from that site reminds me of certain less-than-stable ENTPs I've met. They can give long, flowing analyses of various subjects, their Ne+Ti working in tandem to come up with a lot of good arguments, but the moment that someone puts them down, all that tertiary Fe comes out, and it is vicious.
Read his article comparing INTJs and ENTJs and you'll see what I mean, in droves. There's no real argument in the entire thing, no real point, besides "ENTJs are just life's muscleheaded jocks and INTJs are all a bunch of self-absorbed emos who can't get out of their head long enough to do anything with their life", delivered in the most needlessly vulgar framework I've ever seen.
Case in point. I read that article after I read the one you linked on this thread. It's very convincing, until you actually step away and think about it more. That's the problem, ultimately; I can cite a number of examples from my own life, from other INFJs I know, which utterly disprove his supposed image of the self-deluded INFJ Pygmalion. It's a very accurate description of a deeply dysfunctional INFJ, but to take it from him, all INFJs are like that. Or all ENTJs and INTJs, if we're going by his other article.
I really can't take his works seriously, not when he's prepared to post senseless, rage-fueled rants and pass them off as genuine articles like his other work. Thus why I said, before, that the article had gotten me to think, which is something I've found that pretty much all ENTPs are good at. But I wouldn't say that he had sold me on his particular theory, not after he's already proven his utter lack of integrity elsewhere on the blog.