One minor tactical point neither article mentions is the fact that advisor works best when your opponent doesn't know what cards you need this turn. The main take away here is that you should play all advisors first and try and let your opponent know as little as possible about what's in your hand while there's still a possibility of playing more advisors. If you're playing a long string of advisors, then she knows a lot about what's in your hand anyway, but the point is that she might be more tempted to give you terminals if she didnt know you had villages among the 4 non-advisor cards you started with.
Advisor also has a mild antisynergy with cards like Hunting Party that reveal your hand for this same reason. (Menagerie is among these cards, but you're going to have a hard time making your menageries work with advisor. Menagerie is a straight up stronger card and you're much better off trying to make menagerie work than advisor in cases where both are possible.) I don't think an opponent going for advisor is a good reason to get a bureaucrat.
This is of course important for playing against advisor. You can easily observe how many of his starting 5 cards were advisors. Tracking your opponent's deck is also useful insofar as it helps you guess whether their hand is full of terminals or villages.
(i seem to love [hr\])
Incidentally, both articles mention that high advisor concentration is useful, but neither list workshops among synergies. (ed's article does mention them.) They don't just add advisors either - they also help fill your deck with other decent stuff/cantrips so that there are relatively fewer junk cards for your opponent to give you. Many advisor support cards (workshop, storeroom, cellar) are under $5 as well. A workshop is thus a strong advisor enabler, so gainers deserve to be on the list. (Hermit works too; the trashing is nice, and even silver makes the opponent's choices harder, though obviously oasis/warehouse/what have you make hermit better.)
