Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

I wouldn't, and I do feel accountable for things that I write during the peer-review process. You can construe scenarios in which it would hurt the reviewer, but I do not feel like this is one of them.>

It's likely a high-power individual and unidentifiable for most people. Keeping everything about peer-review secret for the sake of it doesn't help if people abuse the process to defend their world-views.

I agree with most of that, and as a reviewer I hope to be held accountable. At the end of the day, this reviewer (no matter who it was, status, etc. included) did not consent to - or have any expectation that - anything they wrote to the editor would be blasted out to thousands.

It's tough to find reviewers for papers. It's unpaid, unthanked intellectual labor. We do it because we care about science. I think the least we can do is respect the implied privacy and confidentiality of that unpaid labor.

I get your general point but in this case I think it's outweighed by the value of seeing what people are willing to write anonymously. This excerpt is unambiguously bad and I doubt whoever wrote it would be willing to stand behind it publicly...but yet it can block publication

I also agree with your general point :) I would love to see reviews published alongside the paper. LOVE IT. And some people behave shittily when anonymous In the meantime, I don't love taking unpaid intellectual labor meant for a few to read and blasting it out widely.