The article is mostly a summary, but then a third party weights in. Go, Georgy Koentges, go!
“There is no such thing as a good or bad gene. It doesn’t work that simply. Genes are used and re-used in different contexts, each of which might have a different overall fitness value for a given organism or a group.”
One thing that bugged me in the article was the writer using “Darwinist.” “Darwinist” is a pejorative and a shibboleth. Dawkins is not a Darwinist. Creationists tend to use that term, in the naive assertion that Charles Darwin is some cult leader or prophet to a belief in evolution, rather than a scientist who advanced human knowledge.
Besides, Dawkins is a Dawkinsist, if anything.