This is because Larry Sanger is crazy. There are legitimate criticisms of Wikipedia to be made, but citing them to Sanger makes them weaker not stronger.
I mean... according to him, that company's business HAS suffered. Granted, he blames it on a conspiracy out to "cancel" him with advertisers rather than technical problems, but still.
Per other comments in the thread, Ms. De Santis might be imaginary and just a way to puff Ms. Rossi up. At the least, her portrait was a stock photograph on the staff page of RECEPTIO.
There are some science-y reasons in support of (2), though. Granted, we are biased by being familiar with human life, of course. Consider this: phosphorus is a fairly rare element out there. It's comparatively common on Earth vs. other parts of the galaxy, and "more common" is still somewhat rare on Earth. Yet, Earth life has gone out of its way to use phosphorus for some fairly key parts of itself (DNA!) despite its rarity. Maybe it's path dependence / weird luck, but maybe phosphorus really is that much better than other elements for such purposes. If phosphorus really is both very rare galactically AND key for the development of advanced life, that really does argue in favor of (2), that Earth just hit the cosmic jackpot for sustainability of life. (High phosphorus scarcity would also make interstellar colonization by humans a non-starter... we'd be stuck using robots to explore at best.)
If nothing else, the time issue is a huge one. Cheaters have very consistent seconds-per-move while actual masters make obvious moves instantly and pause on tougher moves.
Xoogler here. Back at Google, there was an explicit policy that "heroic" efforts result in at most a bump of one level on the internal assessment scale - there was an idea that you should be doing productive work without having to overwork yourself, and too much "willing to work constantly" from reports was a danger sign for the manager's performance review. (Granted, this also could be super stressful for borderline employees, who are essentially told that even if they work hard, we'll still fire you.)
The original Reddit post somewhat overstated the nature of "several people expressed concern." Nobody told him outright that despite what he might think, he did not really know Scots. That one screenshot'd, anonymized conversation was the one time something like that happened in seven years - but that could very easily be read as a criticism of those specific translations, not of his work as a whole. It seems as if the Reddit OP was the first person to notice the editor's systemic incompetence and failure to understand the degree of his lack of fluency. So... no, I don't think he ever made this "second and bigger mistake", aside from general massive naivety. After being told explicitly now, he's certainly ashamed and horrified at wasting so much time on his own personal dialect of Scots.