Let it be known I have no problems with harshly-written critiques. Indeed, many critiques benefit heavily from stronger language(not "strong language" as in cursing, but heavy remarks). I've read all of the entries and a good chunk of the critiques of those entries thus far, and while some were harsh in nature there was nothing I personally would called shitslinging. All critiques thus far may have contained strong language, but it was always surrounded by a thoughtful and well spoken review of the entry/entries they were focused on.

Aside from that, the two parties that the recent back-and-forth were the focus of disengaged on amicable terms, so nothing more needs to be said. No corrective actions shall be issued.

In the future, I ask only that participants and third party voters not go out of their way to antagonize anybody for how their critiques and reviews are written. If one has doubts as to the merit of a certain critique, please shoot me a message. I am always more than happy to take a closer look at one and see if there is truly anything malicious or libelous in the way it is written.