I think you need to provide a lot more substance behind the claims you’ve made here.
If you think the problem is the quality of research, my suggestion is to give James some feedback, or to publish some substantive pushbacks of his work.
If you think his intentions are in question, then I’d appreciate documentation of this or at least some indication of the strength of evidence you have but can’t share so third parties know this isn’t just some vibe you’re getting.
I didn’t downvote, but if someone thought your claims were far too strong for the evidence provided and thought it represented a degradation of epistemic norms on the forum, or was unnecessarily unkind, it could be a good enough reason for a downvote. (At time of writing it has −4 karma over 4 votes, but +1 agreement vote over 3 votes)
I think you need to provide a lot more substance behind the claims you’ve made here.
If you think the problem is the quality of research, my suggestion is to give James some feedback, or to publish some substantive pushbacks of his work.
If you think his intentions are in question, then I’d appreciate documentation of this or at least some indication of the strength of evidence you have but can’t share so third parties know this isn’t just some vibe you’re getting.
I didn’t downvote, but if someone thought your claims were far too strong for the evidence provided and thought it represented a degradation of epistemic norms on the forum, or was unnecessarily unkind, it could be a good enough reason for a downvote. (At time of writing it has −4 karma over 4 votes, but +1 agreement vote over 3 votes)