It is too bad that Atlasphere does not have a "Dissent" category like the one here on Solo - I would have preferred to see a discussion of the inaccuracies, rather than have it disappear without explanation. I am, among other things, a psychologist, and if there are inaccuracies in the article's description of Golen's work, I need to know about them. The issues raised are directly relevant to a senior course that I am teaching this quarter, about management of the software development process. Techniques for minimizing conflict between software developers (primacy-of-existence technical types) and non-technical managers (often primacy-of consciousness Peter Keatings) make up a large part of the course. If I don't know what is wrong with the article - or, quite possibly with claims that the article is wrong - much of the value for me is gone.
Incidentally, the phenomenon of the software developers' "humanistic" bosses and colleagues doing things without fact-based explanation, and how to deal with that, is discussed in the course. Is there a "Peter Keating" problem at Atlasphere?
Can you bring the author of the article, and the person who brought up the criticism, here to Solo, so they can discuss the issues and bring our knowledge closer to fact? At minimum, could we have contact information for the author and the critic? Or is one or the other not willing to present and defend his claims in an open forum? That, too, could be informative.