Sharing code is not always the answer. Independent thinking implies independence, in code and more abstractly.

The real 'mistake' is allowing the drama to escalate to the point that it is toxic. People who are truly interested don't care about who is right and who is wrong.

When disagreements like this come up, having common and good test cases are probably the most important (and is indeed the way in which the problem, generation of non-Boltzman behavior, was found).

In the end ST2 itself is flawed, and Princeton admitted that the discussion of water was not significantly advanced through this drama. Is it worth it?

Understanding the argument and its importance should be the focus.