Changes

|Verdict Rationale=Commentators agreed that Fatigati provided "a compelling case for the power of ‘authoritative texts’ to serve as indicators of accepted theories in MASM"^{[[Modification_talk:Sciento-2017-0003#comment-188||c1]]} and that "it is perfectly reasonable to rely on authoritative texts to determine what was a part of the MASM".^{[[Modification_talk:Sciento-2017-0003#comment-44||c2]]} It was also noted that we must "take the idea of the MASM as a monolithic community with a grain of salt",^{[[Modification_talk:Sciento-2017-0003#comment-51||c3]]} which is in tune with Fatigati's own position. Fatigati's modification was also praised "as an exemplar for future work in observational scientonomy" especially as due to its potential to spur "further interest in studies of scientific mosaics outside of the immediate Western tradition".^{[[Modification_talk:Sciento-2017-0003#comment-51||c4]]} It was noted that this "type of research will need to be carried out on a very large scale if observational scientonomy is to achieve its lofty goals". Specifically, research focusing on various "small communities" could potentially "bring some observational evidence into the discussion of Necessary Elements" and "might prove of interest for future scientonomists interested in exploring the Role of Sociocultural Factors in Scientific Change".^{[[Modification_talk:Sciento-2017-0003#comment-51||c5]]}