Hey Chris. Nice article. I see what you're up to now though so you can't talk about us behind our backs with impunity anymore!
Anyway, for everyone else, I think what he is saying in the article is more broad than just "don't let in-game conflict bleed over to real life conflict". In the case he cited about the terminal decision in his current game, as one of the players involved, I was in no way upset at the other player. As a player, I totally understood why the other player was having his character behave that way. However, given my character's personality, and that fact that she was upset, I kept going with it because that was what she would do. I think Chris is saying that even in this situation, where there are no real-life hard feelings, it is still ok to metagame in order to resolve the situation.
The way it worked out in this example is the other character said basically "That is how it is and if you don't like it then you can leave!" and my character said "Fine then!" This is where the GM stepped in and said "OK, I understand that this is how your characters feel and would behave but realistically, <to him> you can't let her leave, <to me> and you can't leave. So we need to find a way to have this fight work out so that doesn't happen." At that point, we discussed what it was that our characters were really upset about and what would be the best way for them to handle it in game so that the terminal decision would be avoided. We then went back in-character and played it out the way we decided to out-of-character.
Obviously, if there were also real-life hurt feelings, this approach would be good for that situation as well.
-Me