Your guess is correct. From this (annoyingly politicized) article, http://retractionwatch.com/2014/07/18/the-camel-doesnt-have-two-humps-programming-aptitude-t

Your guess is correct. From this (annoyingly politicized) article, http://retractionwatch.com/2014/07/18/the-camel-doesnt-have-two-humps-programming-aptitude-test-canned-for-overzealous-conclusion/ http://retractionwatch.com/2014/07/18/the-camel-doesnt-have-... ... comes the following quote from the author of the camel-humps paper: "I presented our latest results about 18 months ago at a PPIG workshop/conference in the UK. I felt it was helpful, since the claims I made had provoked hostility to the work, to retract those claims verbally. It had a dramatic effect, to the good. But I found (how I know is the confidential bit) that there are people who didn’t hear that retraction, and who are still hostile; and that hostility is doing harm. So I decided to retract more publicly. "Interestingly, one person who I would have counted previously as hostile heard (indirectly) of the verbal retraction, and this summer was more than supportive. Research inspired by our work is going forward. So the retraction was worthwhile." So, confirmed: there was an angry backlash, and this retraction is an attempt to calm people down.