Dear Robin Neill and David Collander: Quite. It is certainly true that peer review leads to a policing of the boundaries of Normal Science. And so peer review is no cure-all for bad work---on the contrary, it forces the production of a good deal of it. Peer review in the production of journal articles is greatly overrated as a check on bad work. Mainly it enforces orthodoxy. And yes, David, I can well believe that peer-reviewed Science is a rather small portion of what an economist, even an academic economist, does. Therefore: be it resolved that we will not participate in ranking schemes. Instead, we will commit to reading some of the work of people we are required to assess. Regards, Deirdre McCloskey