[jacobolus]

> The main valid complaints [...] the legitimate issues raised [...]

This is a really passive-aggressive weaselly phrasing. I’d recommend reconsidering this type of tone in public discussion responses.

Instead of suggesting that the other complaints were invalid or illegitimate, you could just not mention them at all, or at least use nicer language in brushing them aside. E.g. “... the main actionable complaints...” or “the main technical complaints ...”

* * *

> [...] I certainly don't think that this is a major complaint at this point. [...] it's hard to consider this unaddressed [...] fixed

After reading the original post and your responses, I think the responses come across as pretty smug and dismissive.

Third-party readers would probably be more optimistic if you just left it at “we’ve made a lot of improvement since then and we’re still working on it” or similar.

[StefanKarpinski]

Sorry if it came off as smug or dismissive, that was not the intention. I was trying to be precise – we haven't fixed everything that Dan complained about, but some of those complaints were very subjective or things that I didn't think were fair and therefore wouldn't claim to have fixed.

[wbhart]

I read the final line completely differently to you. I read it as saying that the aforementioned issues were definitely legitimate and have therefore been addressed.

However, like you, I noted that some of the complaints had not been accepted.

[CyberDildonics]

Giving any validity to someone with an obvious ax to grind is already going above and beyond.