I sympathize with your situation. People are fallible arbiters of truth and relevancy. But why was the fact that this editor was a guitarist have relevance? Was

I sympathize with your situation. People are fallible arbiters of truth and relevancy. But why was the fact that this editor was a guitarist have relevance? Was that his/her stated profession (and so by implication you're saying they overestimate their ability as an editor in this particular field of science industry ala Dunning-Kruger effect)?