There's no logical disconnect. Just a difference in writing style.

Stric9 nailed this one. The Mind Spring point was to illustrate how cards that have similar functionality and that are normally used identically are frequently compared in a strict sense, but that it is incorrect to do so. The other comments were explaining why Mind Spring is functionally better, which is what leads most people to their incorrect conclusion that it is strictly better. It is also to point out that while Mind Spring is considered better, there are too many variables to compare them strictly.
If this still doesn't make sense to you, then I'm unfortunately out of ideas because I have no idea where the disconnect in logic is coming from which is making it hard to address.

Jeebus is actually reinforcing his point that "strictly better" must be used within the appropriate context and with the appropriate definition. He is doing that by pointing out that while their functions are similar, they are not exactly the same. The entire purpose of that paragraph is to point out that people misuse the phrase "strictly better" when comparing cards of like function. Since people often use "strictly better" to compare cards that have similar, but not exactly the same, functions it makes perfect sense to address the issue.

Let me add, I think the entirety of the article is bang on. I'm really glad you chose to succinctly clarify an issue that's been so misrepresented. However, the Mind Spring point juxtaposed with the precision of the rest of the piece, sticks out as discordant.

I'm glad you put it that way. Another way to put it is that the discussion of first statement is in no way relevant to the topic of the article. It's a debatable which is "better", and tangential to the real point of the article. In an article describing a "science", a haphazard comparison that eschews your methodology is out of place.

How so? Card interactions are not taken into account in determining which is strictly better. They are taken into account in determining which is the regular kind of better. The truth of the second statement in absolutely no way is relevant to the discussion of the first statement.

"Simply put, card interactions are not taken into account. Cards are strictly better than each other in a vaccum."

While you didn't say Mind Spring was "strictly better", your analysis contradicts your methodology.