I've essentially given up on the entire filter words discussion, not because it wasn't a worthwhile discussion, but because it's been hijacked by authors who, while deriding any 'absolute rules' also seem to demand absolute rules anytime authors discuss techniques in writing.
Despite laying out just when to use these techniques (filler words like "that", "then", "just" you eliminate if they can be deleted without changing the meaning of sentence, and filter words are removed if they 'distance' the reader, or talk about how character 'feel' or experience things rather than letting the reader experience it themselves), these authors seem to think it's not valid discussing any technique unless there are hard and fast rules for their use (ex: Only use on Tuesday and Thursdays between 10a.m. and 3p.m.).
However, that's simply not how writing works. You can't reduce fine writing to a few simple punctuation rules. What you have to do with these techniques is apply them on a case by case basis. Most of us do this by searching for specific words, and then evaluate each use (I've generally found that 30% of all -ly adverbs can simply be stripped with no loss in most chapters. That's a classic case of 'unnecessary' -ly adverbs. But these are those of us who'll only accept any technique if it has hard and fast rules. They don't like evaluating individual sentences for efficiency.
Frankly, I've got no solution to this dilemma. You either put in the work required to use these techniques, or you just don't use them at all. There's no requirement that you cut any words out of your writing you don't want to. So I'm flummoxed by these demands. If you don't like (or don't understand) the techniques, don't criticize those discussing them, simply ignore them.