What about this qualifies it as an "order" (i.e. worthy of taking offense to), as opposed to merely an imperative sentence (e.g. "don't feed dogs chocolate")?

Well, the dictionary definition of "imperative" is "giving an authoritative command; peremptory."

Does this answer your question?

And does "Remove it ASAP" sound like "Don't feed dogs chocolate" to you?

to me it does yes, or maybe more akin to "remove your hand from the hot stove ASAP". But hey, if you wanna burn your hands just because someone tells you not to, your choice.

Hands on a hot stove get burns. That's universally not wanted, and an objective health hazzard.

Whether Audacity's telemetry is a problem, or whether the fuss about it is mere hysteria for quite basic error and usage reporting, is up to the user to decide. Alarmist headlines and "Remove it ASAP" (Really? Do you have an alternative for me to use? Do you know whether I might not have 200 much worse privacy wise programs I use anyway and could not care less?) doesn't help.

Is this really that hard to parse?

Not hard to parse, but you are arguing a bit besides the point. It is a solid recommendation given the point of the article. You are of course free to disagree, but then don't argue about the recommendation, but simply give your argument.

Regarding the Hand on stove, it isn't any more "objective" than this a recommendation, there is simply more subjective evidence of it's being bad. Qualitative arguments like that are seldom useful in my experience, focus on the evidence, as I believe you did further down in the thread.

Don't tell me what to feed my dogs!