I laid out why I thought this book might be overclaiming for the status of its subject. I said "I might be wrong", and then gave evidence from the fact that the achievements mentioned in the review don't seem huge. This is a "dog didn't bark in the night" argument: if Lady R had amazing achievements, the review would have mentioned them. But again, maybe I'm wrong! Feel free to read the book, or other sources, and rebut me with evidence. I'll happily hold my hands up. That would be a much more effective argument than accusing me of bias.

Having bias but being open to change one's mind is a correct application of the Bayes' theorem, isn't it?

(I agree the root comment was a bit... weird, let's put it that way, but the author themselves acknowledged that)

I mean ... who cares. Having bias, then calling it as win or acting like no one is allowed to point out it is bias is not correct application of the Bayes' theorem.

I did not flagged the comment nor downvoted it. I responded to claim that it was win. Which responded to claim that the comment took offense.