Hi Jeff, nice piece of article.
Actually I’m not a big fan of the Zen attitude, and your conclusion, though ironic, seems a bit void to me 
Thus I suggest using “necessity” instead of “brevity”. By “necessity” I mean: only add statements that are strictly necessary to prove the code is working.
And because I think “necessity” can take many forms, you can make it more or less “explicit” as a trade-off. By that I mean to make the circumstances under which the code works more or less explicit.
Why I do find interesting to challenge your view? Because it focuses on making the code working (not just nice), and integrating the assumption into it (not just readable).
The full post is here: http://lecoupdansloeil.blogspot.com/2007/06/coding-horror-best-code-is-no-code-at.html
Thanks!