Wow. They specifically requested an email.
Such an ugly way to publicly respond. Oh wait, it’s “peer review”.
Nah.
They posted to a forum on which they don’t participate much — which is their prerogative. Their remarks were defensive from the start gate.
They went with a shunting “if you have an issue, you can email me.” They did so without providing, in discussion,
how to do so, or how to address it so that it brings this discussion to their prompt attention, on their own time table. Thanks, but I’m not going to go hunting around on their web site when I know full well they’re paying attention to this discussion right here and right now. They opened the invitation for review, even if defensively (and publicly) and I provided one such review, but in
this forum — where that invitation was extended. And I thanked them for the service they provide.
I’m not sure what more they (or you) were expecting.
Peer review means just that, and it’s not intended to be a mollycoddling experience or exercise.
@everymac came into this discussion as a peer, on par with you or me or anyone else who’s posted on this thread. If you’re a regular lurker and/or participant here on the MR forums, you also know how that review is oftentimes collegial, steady, and discursive (i.e., a two-way conversation, often evolving with curious new things we learn along the way). And in fact, I concluded my reply to
@everymac with that collegiality, and I very much mean it.
Generally,
@Certificate of Excellence , you and I don’t engage much, because you got off on the wrong foot with me when you joined a year ago, as you made some pretty snarky, unproductive, and even combative remarks. As memory (and probably a good search into the archives here) serves, I wasn’t going to indulge your behaviour.
So yes, peer review is a thing, it’s happening within this thread, and it’s not always going to be smooth sailing. But eventually the rough waters end, and the community is all enriched with the knowledge we gain from getting through it — the review.
