>>Ah, so you do it to learn the program at hand.
>>
>>Aren't you really saying that you prefer to "learn" a program that way than to read the code carefully?... and probably because the coding style of the original is not to your liking?
>
>Spaghetti code, spaghetti code, shaghetti code... it's just sometimes too difficult to trace through without refactoring.
>
>>
>>Your "refactoring" and testing in little bits is a reasonable strategy, but you've surely got to agree that this method results in much longer development time than simply learning the existing code and changing as needed.
>
>It depends on the end goal. In my case, the end goal was to learn the entire system, document it, and improve it where needed.
>
SNIP

That's a different thing entirely.
The article is basically saying 'if you see something you don't like you SHOULD (feel obligated to) change it'. This is what I take issue with.
Something not to my liking but working is far more valuable than something I have to redevelop and test just to get it looking like I want. A wasteful effort for sure.