The infographics you link to are gray, crowded, artsy and overdone. They pushed me back so hard that I didn't even bother to figure out what they are about.
I respect your competancy in the security realm. But I doubt you're competant enough in the infographics genre to justify the eleborate bashing that you posted higher up in this thread.
I'm happy to argue about graphic design and will concede up front that I'm not an expert.
My criticism of the OP's resume, though, are about the resume infographic as a resume infographic. Like many, many people on HN, I'm certainly qualified to "elaborately bash" a bad resume.
Next, while I respect that you might disagree about the Feltron annual reports, it's certainly not a personal quirk that I like them; I learned about them from the Kottke/Gruber nexus on the web, and other people (notably, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Wired, Creative Review, Print Magazine, Slate, and AIGA) have called the reports out as well.
Finally, I hope you understand that I'm addressing the "style" part of the "style vs. substance" issue with this resume by citing Feltron.
Yes and I don't agree with this apples vs oranges comparison, which is why I pointed out how unsuitable the Feltron infographics would be for a resume - no matter how well they may work in the context of an annual report.
The goal of her infographic is to catch attention and force-feed information while glancing. If that resume landed on my desk then I would look at it longer than at most others, simply because it's visually pleasing and interesting (read: different).
I agree that I wouldn't want to receive such a resume for the position of, say, a security researcher or for a (wait for it) infographics designer. But for the position of a web-designer or rails-developer I don't think this deserves the flak you were giving it.