There is consensus documenting why you did something is good (which is what root comment is talking about). Documenting what you did is commonly thought to be a crutch for writing unreadable code.
I hate the second thought, because not documenting is clearly not stopping people from committing the unreadable code. Instead we get "my code is self-documenting, I'm not going to write documentation".
And as for the third opinion of "the documentation becomes out of date when the code changes", I would prefer slightly incorrect comments to decipher code rather than no comments to decipher code. Doubly so because I can compare the comments to historical revisions.
While I _absolutely_ agree with those sentiments, I have seen nothing like consensus on them myself (in mostly tech startups, but also fintech, and financial (yes, those are different things)). If I limit it to programmers I respect, the percentages go up, but to _maybe_ 75% tops.
And as for the third opinion of "the documentation becomes out of date when the code changes", I would prefer slightly incorrect comments to decipher code rather than no comments to decipher code. Doubly so because I can compare the comments to historical revisions.