Hey, Greg, are the reviews of your mirror neuron review juicy enough that they are worth posting on the blog? I don't know if it's legitimate to post reviews of a journal article on a blog. Are there guidelines about this sort of thing?
However, given what's at stake, and given how much influence the wretched mirror neuron action perception hypothesis has, it would be both intellectually helpful and sociologically fun to see such reviews and pick at them.
I'm certainly willing -- if we can agree that it's ethically defensible -- to post some of the more outrageous reviews that I've gotten. For example, that I "understand virtually nothing". Man, that hurt my feelings! Anyway, this might not be doable, although it would be a whole lot of fun.
It would be particularly interesting to find out about how your paper will be treated in subsequent rounds of pure review and the editorial process.
Maybe, in fact, the occasional readers of this blog would comment more if it meant posting one of the more bizarre reviews that they have gotten in their own research... :-) Nothing like a little levity to balance the pain of negative reviews.