I have a different approach for create a similar outcome: everyone rotates projects on a periodic basis. The period of change is longer than a sprint duration so as to give people time to acclimate to the new-to-them project.
Your approach is lawful, the one in the article is chaotic.
Your approach is planned, with well defined onboarding and offboarding and with a report in the end. Personally, I hate it just for the idea of having to write a report.
The article approach in unpredictable. At the last moment, you know you are not part of the team anymore, and all communications are cut. People have to take over even if you are in the middle of something. It also involves managers. I prefer this, if anything, just because there is no report to write except if things go wrong (i.e. you break the "no communication" rule).
The chaotic version of your solution would involve periodically drawing two team members, including managers and having them switch teams immediately. For each individual, the period of change would follow an average but be random. And no reports :)
[0] https://graphthinking.blogspot.com/2021/06/periodic-rotation...