<p>This paper is a satire of the response document submitted when a paper needs revisions. It expresses the perspective of a disgruntled author, who, instead of actually discussing the reviewers’ comments, gets sidetracked into complaining about the role of the peer reviewer. Through a discussion of the goals of philosophical research, it defends the claim that philosophers should be allowed to charter their own course and develop theories that appease their intellectual tastes. Yet, peer reviewers often insert their own tastes when reviewing a manuscript. As a result, too many papers end up getting rejected.</p>