Thirteen years on, that statement from heedm is still correct.
However, being an oversimplication, and it isn't really, is much better than being flat wrong and denying, somewhat absurdly and just because someone told you to, that all the standard rotational dynamics that everyone knows is
not helpful in explaining how rotors respond.
It catches the direction of everything that happens, and the powers, forces and timescales involved. It even explains the orientation of the cyclic feathering motion, without introducing an arbitrary right angle from getting the difference between acceleration and speed mixed up.
"Sikorsky eventually found that it all worked if you did that" isn't much of an explanation, and I'll bet Sikorsky's surely excellent knowledge of rotational mechanics based on his Russian technical education lead to him getting the phase right in his control systems, if not intuitively then consciously.