I disagree; you do not have to be a negative person to point these things out. IMHO the author was simply trying to help
anyone developing a web app avoid what he sees as a bad tool
Let's look at the four sub-headlines of the article:
>> 1. If you can't design it, you shouldn't build it.
My version of this (idiotic) axiom: Don't reinvent the wheel every time you need to pick up groceries.
>> 2. Your homepage will suck and you will have no brand.
Homepage? (What is this 1999?) Bootstrap is clearly intended for web apps. If you want to create an interesting "homepage", maybe you could try the ever-popular CopyPasta library from 37Signals...
>> You will have no new ideas.
Again, I counter this (also idiotic) axiom with another, less idiotic truism: You will stand on the shoulders of giants (or at least upon a giant pyramid of smart people). BTW, maybe someone should teach the OP how to override/alter stylesheets.
>> You will forget about information architecture.
Actually, you will leverage proven IA, and get the benefit of lots of people's opinions about what works and what doesn't. Like it or not, users' expectations drive most of what you call "UX". Bootstrap is a better-than-average collection of web app conventions. The last thing the world needs is another "innovative" navigation metaphor.
By the way, you could take every one of the OP's ridiculous arguments and apply them to, say, HTML. Should we be using Flash so that we aren't painted into the corner of HTML tags? It's such a stupid position, that it hurts my brain. I am promising myself not to spend another second on this thread...
It's a community-maintained library that is designed for bootstrapping web apps – hence the name "Bootstrap".
How someone could take that, and turn it into this content-free, nonsensical, holier-than-thou tripe is beyond me.