[lowkey]

That the “critique” is posted on such a spamtaculous site doesn’t lend much credibility. I looked but didn’t find other negative reviews.

I did read the book and it seemed well cited.

If there are no more credible reviews do you care to substantiate your specific concerns with her work?

[KempyKolibri]

If you’re discounting a rigorous and well-referenced critique solely because it’s on a “spamtaculous” cite, then my intuition is that either you’re a motivated reasoner and nothing would push you off your position, or your epistemic framework for deciding what is credible and what isn’t is so wild that trying to discuss this issue with you would be like trying to teach French to a dolphin.

Just read the critique, ignore whatever “spamtaculous” things you’re seeing on the site. The content of the review is what we should care about. Happy to discuss that.