The article is less about opting for snark over smarm, than it is about reading too much onto the method of delivery ie: "I can't imagine a good teacher being smug about it", being politicized in a particular way.
It kinda runs counter to the position you're advancing, but I thought you'd find it interesting anyway.
Fair enough. I started skimming around halfway through so I missed that.
I'd agree that there are limits to what you can read into the method of delivery, but:
I think anger and indignance are valid attitudes to have, and that seems largely what he's defending. They're not like smugness in that I can still imagine someone sincerely caring about the truth having them.
I'd also point out that I react with discomfort when I see smugness from my side, and annoyance when I see smugness from the other side, and these are physiological reactions that can't exactly be controlled.
I guess I didn't see much actual content in the Bond article (ironically, most of _that_ article was criticizing method of delivery), so the method of delivery was all I had to comment on.
It kinda runs counter to the position you're advancing, but I thought you'd find it interesting anyway.