> On one hand, the author seems not up to date with how standards have changed at flagship journals post replication crisis. There are new editorial teams, new

> On one hand, the author seems not up to date with how standards have changed at flagship journals post replication crisis. There are new editorial teams, new standards, and a new culture of avoiding past mistakes. Does this mean things are perfect? No, but that's any human endeavor. But are the replication rates actually improving? That's all that matters. There are no points for effort here.