> Thanks for taking my experience and comment seriously and challenging your preconceptions. I apologise if my comment read as mean. I wanted to make the joke

> Thanks for taking my experience and comment seriously and challenging your preconceptions. I apologise if my comment read as mean. I wanted to make the joke and it may have overshadowed the point. > Do you have any studies to show how effective synchronous code review is in preventing mistakes? I could’ve been clearer. I’m not advocating for code reviews, I’m advocating for not placing “velocity” so high on the list of priorities. > If they are such a good idea why not do 2 or 3? This argument doesn‘t really make sense, though. You’ve probably heard the expression “measure twice, cut once”—you don’t keep measuring over and over, you do it just enough to ensure it’s right.