I respect you and have followed your general commentary with interest for some time. Given that, reviewing this comment section a few months later I want to explicitly state that I believe you made a number of understandable but major errors in your evaluation of this process and should reevaluate the appropriateness of publishing a one-sided article without adequate error-checking and framing requests to correct verifiable, material errors of fact as retaliation now that the more complete picture is available. I’m coming at this fresh with the benefit of never having seen this post until the more complete story was out, but given what is now known I believe the publication and reaction to this post indicates major systemic errors in this sphere.
I respect you and have followed your general commentary with interest for some time. Given that, reviewing this comment section a few months later I want to explicitly state that I believe you made a number of understandable but major errors in your evaluation of this process and should reevaluate the appropriateness of publishing a one-sided article without adequate error-checking and framing requests to correct verifiable, material errors of fact as retaliation now that the more complete picture is available. I’m coming at this fresh with the benefit of never having seen this post until the more complete story was out, but given what is now known I believe the publication and reaction to this post indicates major systemic errors in this sphere.