(I edited my comment as you were replying, sorry about that.) If the reflexive maximally-negative complaints are contradicting the actual information presented

(I edited my comment as you were replying, sorry about that.) If the reflexive maximally-negative complaints are contradicting the actual information presented, they had better come with strong evidence or I’m dismissing them (and I do find those comments more tiresome than press releases or the other negative replies; they come across as conspiratorial crank-cases with an axe to grind, even bordering on spam to my mind). The comments I had in mind are “the most negative interpretation of the information that comports with the facts”, much like the non-information components of the press release are the most positive interpretation of the information that comports with the facts. A press release contains info and fluff. The opposite of soft fluff is hard edges, so perhaps a cute and pithy summary of my view is that no fluffy PR statement is complete without an edgy reply.