You totally misconstrued my meaning. I never said that Yoseikan is the real deal. I mention the original Aikibudo (Aikido) and it's combat roots. The point here is about the methodology of combat, self defense tactics. I only used Yoseikan Aikido as an example. Please don't mix Aikikai methodology with the principles of Aikibudo, because it's not the same.
You said Yoseikan is an example which more closely resembles the combat-oriented roots of Aikido, implying it represents a more realistic approach to self-defense than Aikikai. I took the phrase "real deal" to meant "effective in self-defense" in which case the author was accurately describing your intent...unless of course I'm misunderstanding your (or his) meaning as well.
...are we on the same page? Or are we losing the conveyed meaning to differences in semantics?