<p>This paper responds to my critics in the Synthese topical collection, The Epistemology of John Greco. Part One offers some clarifications and elaborations of earlier work, bringing into focus some themes that I now see better with some hindsight. Most importantly, I draw a distinction between anti-reductionism and anti-individualism in the epistemology of testimony, and I argue that anti-individualism is the deeper and more important issue, here and for social epistemology more generally. Relatedly, I argue that an anti-individualist virtue epistemology must ground knowledge in the competent joint agency of speakers and hearers, rather than in the hearer’s participation in competent joint agency. Part Two responds to my critics more directly, including by drawing on the themes set out in Part One.</p>