It's basically fair as a criticism of 'the cyborgism community' which is a larger set of people than just you. The community should on the margin try to produce more legible knowledge. Part of it should have the 'science' signature. It's mostly just playing 'cooperate' with way broader epistemic community. I was also entirely unsurprised by the main 'introspection' result, but it's quite valuable they wrote it - when trying to explain stuff to people it's useful if I can point them to epistemic artifacts, rather than a combination 'try yourself' & 'trust me' & 'other people who are good at this claim similar things on twitter. Also the epistemic structure where a lot of people would just defer to you based on track record & authority is highly fragile.