While this statement is heard often, interpretation seems to vary so much in the sf community.
I personally prefer a story that focuses on a single idea, & looks at some aspect of it in great detail.
A story that is an encyclopedia of "ideas" nearly always puts me off.
- The so called "ideas" tend to be half-baked both because of their sheer quantity, & almost as often, because author himself is not clear on what these "ideas" mean.
- As a reader, the only way I can read these stories is by shutting my mind off, & treating the sentences as so much drivel. Occasionally I'll give up within first two dozen sentences, sometimes several dozen pages (yes - I sometimes feel lazy putting a bad story down - sheer inertia!).
Of course, there are occasional exceptions. "Doc" Smith's Lenseman immediately comes to mind. I guess I can enumerate some more if I spend some time thinking about it. But there aren't many.