Point taken. In retrospect, directfs is not a good name as it gives the impression of a new filesystem implemention. I should have named this more along the lines of "direct access mode" as some of you have pointed out.
I think the comment which was in response to mine is pretty ambiguous, it isn’t obvious to me what they mean by “here” (in the article, in the comment I responded to, or in my comment?).
I will blame whoever named directfs for using a confounding name one way or the other. :V