Why is it mean? The author is above critique?
Considering that he is a somewhat well known expert in the field who has been doing full time research on it for a decade.
It is interesting however, how you weren't familiar with him at all [1] 20 minutes before describing him as a well-known expert.
I looked it up, and he seems to have worked on research in that area for a decade.
The author of the blog post could have checked the same before making the claims.
I have no idea how the original authors competency is, I know nothing about them.
There is however a strong correlation between people being influencers and kinda mediocre at what they're an influencer in - which is frankly understandable, because a large part of their skillset is usually more towards attracting an audience and making the topic interesting.
Usually the true domain experts rarely interface with the public beyond their professional capacity.
You are splitting hairs for no reason, while standing on the wrong side of this discussion.
Feel free to criticize the project on its actual content.
Or perhaps a Google Scholar means jack shit? Since when is that the official measure of an expert.
It doesn't seem unreasonable to think it mean if I were to make up speculative negative assumptions about you which undermined something you've been working hard on for a long period of time.
I know nothing about the author, I'm just watching this whole spectacle unfold.
You are on the wrong side of this whole discussion, there is only one people here who needs calling out and it's not Bend's author.