The authors of the arsenic review paper I described in the previous post have put up a response to my comment. It's a bit hard to find the comments for this paper, so here's a link.
Basically, they don't read online science that hasn't been peer-reviewed, and thus the content of their article was written independently of the post-publication discussion of the Wolfe-Simon paper. They would not have cited this discussion in any case because it was neither peer-reviewed nor personally communicated to them. They feel that although some online communication about science may be of high quality, its value is negated by the simultaneous presence of low-quality material.