In their reply to our article, Greenwald, Rudman, Nosek, and Zayas offered comments on the use of their procedure relative to one that focuses on standard multiple regression (SMR) methods). Here we address five issues where we think a balance of perspective is called for: (a) issues of measurement, (b) the structuring and reporting of the simulations, (c) testing "pure" multiplicative models, (d) the meta-analysis, and (e) tests for deviations from bilinearity. On several occasions in their reply, Greenwald et al. stated our positions in the extreme (e.g., that we argued that no psychological measure can have ratio level properties). We will not react to these statements here, but we urge the reader to not be swayed by the setting up of straw men.