EKW

My time was half my average time for a Saturday, still thought the Naticks were out of control.

Normally I get cranky with puzzles that seem more clever to construct than solve. This was an exception. So impressive than the solving experience seemed secondary. (And even so, there wasn't a lot of trivia.). You managed to take something that often annoys me and be so good at it that it had the opposite effect. Give yourself a round of applause and take the afternoon off. Well done.

The average of the commentary seems about right; puzzle was trivia-heavy but at least somewhat clever; likely to be frustrating for some people (a little to me, too, though I couldn't go so far as to say it was Natick-y). Maybe slightly light on revelations. It was OK?

I really liked this puzzle though it seemed kind of hard. I hear the criticisms of the fill and would defend anyone who said they hated it. But let's also give thanks to what there weren't: Naticks, which (at least to me) startlingly absent, woo hoo! Let's hope this is a trend (unless you like Naticks? maybe those people exist?) I think we'd prefer keep the criticisms to things (and their attributes) and away from people (and their beliefs). Maybe the people producing the bad/good things will get the hint.

Was it me? I'm generally a big hater but this one appealed to me for whatever reason. I did like the idea that the revealer was itself tricky and there wasn't a lot of trivia. Kudos to the constructor though obviously the general commentariat thought differently (and I wouldn't disagree if someone said this was more appropriate for a Saturday).

I have to vote for "about average interest", given how strong the reactions are either way. Seemed average difficulty to me also but xwstats disagrees. Keep up the work!

The amazing theme and construction probably necessitated the so-so fill. But in the end there were few (no?) Naticks so above average, well done!

Tricky identity-oriented trivia, mixed with (IMHO) relatively easy fill for a Saturday, made this seem like an instructional extra credit puzzle for a somewhat opinionated high school sociology class. It seems the reader is being led to a perspective which they may or may not share; and you can guess how readers react to that. The lack of a July 4 connection drove the impression home further though that's on the editors. Construction quality about average for NYT, that is, fine; difficulty consensus per xwstats was easy. Neither of those a problem.

The teehee/haha cross was pretty redundant/uninspired (gender gap / get a grip was similar); some political slant to clues; kinda crossword-use with a lot of ALY/PST/etc. Deadheading was clued wrong as other readers noticed. Easy but not fun.