I think the post you replied to - and some other posts in this thread - are adopting a type of "in fiction" perspective, when the issue that the article is discussing is a real-world issue, about the real-world significance or implications of what is said (or not said/depicted) in the WotC material.
That "in fiction" perspective almost becomes something like a smokescreen to discussing the article itself.
Do you think that's a fair take?
I agree that this does seem to be one of the issues at work here. Now honesty as a black gamer whose group is a mix of black and latino/latina players I was really trying to stay out of this discussion because I've been in discussions like this and inevitably they leave me feeling disappointed in a community I always thought would be more open minded and accepting of everyone... but here's a couple of problems I am seeing with this discussion overall...
1. "Nitpicking & pedantry", Trying to use the situation of the author getting some of the facts wrong as a reason to discredit or invalidate the bigger issue...
2. "But what about syndrome", Trying to use the fact that stereotypes and bad choices have been made for other cultural or ethnic groups (and those specific ones aren't being called our by the author to again dismiss or belittle the importance of the issues that were called out.
3. "Racesplaining", This is hilarious (in a not funny but do you realize the irony way) to me because it's basically when the white males in a group want to tell you how you as a people should or shouldn't group yourselves... i.e. blacks in america aren't all one community or group...people of color refers to so many disparate groups that it's meaning less. Like really do you hear yourself, once again you're trying to exert control and define a people you aren't even a member of.
4. "But there's more to the Realms"... Yes and? Did the author review a Realms sourcebook? Bringing up the fact that the Realms has other black or African based cultural groups does nothing to address the problems with those in ToA and Chult. This is where WotC decided to set this adventure and this is the african-esque culture they chose to flesh out. The fact that the author of the article isn't a Realms expert and thinks this is the only african-esque culture doesn't take away from the points raised about it.
5. "A black isn't a guarantee"... No it isn't because nothing in this world is 100% and bringing up your one culturally unaware black friend as the example is an anecdote that means nothing (and is actually kind of insulting)... because there's also the very real chance that WotC does hire a black person who is culturally aware (I mean wouldn't that be what they were looking for in a consultant for this type of project?) and is able to make changes in their adventure that make it not just more culturally sensitive but a better all around book.
6. "(racist)Stereotypes vs. Knowledge"... You spoke to this one but I just want to reiterate... racist stereotypes and caricatures of african culture in fantasy aren't based in knowledge... they are the exact opposite of having real knowledge and were fabricated mostly during the pulp era. Claiming designers shouldn't be called out for falling back on them since they are using the knowledge they have is a cop out, plain and simple.
7. "Do it yourself"... No, just no this is a dishonest way of trying to dismiss the validity of issues being brought up. Movie critics, videogame critics, literary critics, sports commentators and so on are all people who critique things they don't necessarily do... but for some reason if someone want to critique this adventure with a cultural/racial focus... they should instead be writing their own supplements? when someone submits a non-favorable review of an rpg on this site I don't see the same people telling them to go write their own if they think the product has faults r isn't a good one, why is this different.
I'm trying to keep myself from ranting but I've seen all of the above in this thread and the fact of the matter is none of these actually addresses the issues the author brought up in the article.