Your article failed to address Michael’s interesting points. You only argued the obvious case that appeasement does not work as a strategy.
In Michael's article, the story about the bully repeatedly striking him was his demonstration that appeasement does not work as a strategy. As a tactic however, an individual can consider it the most rational of approaches.
There are many occasions when the most productive tactic is to appease. When someone misinterprets what you say or do, and insults you as a result, you accept that they are morally in the wrong. However rather than insulting them straight back, if you first chose to appease, then the misunderstanding can be corrected, and you walk away without the creation of an opponent who might be able to bite you in the arse at a later stage.
I hope you don’t equate “limp” with cowardice by the way. I consider Michael to be a courgeous and strong man.