But Dean Millot is being fundamentally dishonest in that he misquotes me. He says that I argue: “In short, I see no problem with research becoming public with little or no review.”
In fact I wrote: “In short, I see no problem with research initially becoming public with little or no review.” (See here )
The absence of the word “initially” makes quite a difference and sets up the straw man that Millot wishes to knock down. The issue is not whether research can benefit from peer review, but whether it is inappropriate to make it publicly available INITIALLY, before it has received peer review.
Readers may want to wonder about the credibility of Millot’s claim that “One of the reasons I do my best to quote the very words of people I write about in edbizbuzz is that I prefer to fight fair.”
And so much for Eduwonkette’s praise of Millot’s “measured, careful, and thoughtful analysis.”
I’m waiting for the correction and apology from both of them.