lmao, what a load of crap in that dumb ass article:
"Many clock historians claim that IIII is supposed to provide artistic balance, since you mentally pair it off with VIII on the other side of the dial. (Presumably you see how the otherwise economical IV would have trouble holding its own in this respect.) "
How the fuck do you pair it eh? Maybe they ment III paired with VIII
If you look at a clock face of the type being described, both IIII and VIII are placed in a mirrored location of each other, one notch 'under' the III and IX, respectively. So they do pair/balance that way, which is what they are getting at in that instance. In your example, III would pair with IX, while II would pair with X.
Of course, V would then 'balance' with with VII, which doesn't look 'balanced' to me, so I concur with your inference that it's not worth expending time on the balance argument.
phuck write of ewe type-o crytics
Use your head, don't lose it - Don't feed the trolls!
Boycott Belligerent Boycotters!