Something on the periphery of this article’s theses on pedantry, that comes to mind, is the notion that everything anyone states has to cite some peer-reviewed

Something on the periphery of this article’s theses on pedantry, that comes to mind, is the notion that everything anyone states has to cite some peer-reviewed paper that is published in a prestigious journal; otherwise it’s useless. “Source?” “Citation?” “Papers, please?” Nobody is allowed to think aloud, lest they risk spreading disinformation, despite the utter and complete failure of occidental peer review systems (80% non-reproducible rate, etc.). IMHO, this pedantic behavior also creates a Royal Society-esque gatekeeping environment that is hostile to individual a posteriori contributions, relegating them to “anecdata” status at best. That environment turns out to be also hostile to a priori knowledge creation in general.