Raddle is very post-left. For example:

Anarchists are not leftists, we side with neither monarchy nor republic, dictatorship nor democracy, free market capitalism nor state capitalism. We stand for anarchy. The absolute negation of all authority, including both wings of government.

Like I would argue that the items to the left of the bolded text make anarchists leftists, in the sense that we claim to support (and do support) non-hierarchical modes of living as the classical Left claims to do as well. Of course any serious left-wing anarchists do not want to replicate the left wing of the State. But making that critique and rejecting left unity where it conflicts with our anarchist values does not mean that we're not leftists and that there's nothing to be learned from classical Left literature.

So I would assume that the bias is towards the classical Left. Which...I think that the original FAQ is pretty critical of the classical Left? But a shorter FAQ for outsiders or classical-Left-averse people is still incredibly useful IMO.

I should have clarified in the post; this is not my opinion, nor am I a participant of Raddle. I just found a cool link that I wanted to share.

According to Raddle,

[An Anarchist FAQ] is written entirely by one man and often pushes a strong Bookchinite perspective, to the point of smearing the anarchist currents that Bookchin rallied against

Again, I don't have much of an opinion on this, as I don't know how much of it is true. I haven't read AFAQ in much detail: I preferred the digestibility of Peter Gelderloos' Anarchy Works.

I didn't post this, don't attack random people for linking to anarchist literature because of whatever ancient drama you're fixated on.